Putin willing to burn Snowden as an asset to use him for Russian audience

April 17, 2014

President Putin of Russia badly burned Edward Snowden as an asset for agitprop in the West. There were still many who believed he was a genuine whistleblower who ended up by chance in Moscow. This has been damaged beyond repair by Snowden’s naive question to Putin about whether Putin spies in Russia like the NSA does in the US.

Putin is willing to use up his assets now like Snowden. That shows Putin feels he needs to do so with his Russian audience. That means Putin is going to ask more sacrifice of them, ie he will continue his expansion into Ukraine.

Putin may also be burning assets in the US. Stanley Fischer put himself forward for Fed Vice-chairman when he knew his plagiarism and Russia’s use of it were out. Moreover, it was also out that this had been brought to the attention of the FBI, even if it had not succeeded. That could be seen on social media.

This makes it appear like Stanley Fischer is an asset of Russia. He may have been an agent provocateur in the mold of Edward Corson. Fischer was intended to trap Paul Samuelson to get a Nobel Prize nomination from Samuelson and also Arrow for Kantorovich of the USSR. Russia was in desperation to get such a Prize in econ because there were many former Russians who were winning in the US. Even Samuelson and Arrow were children of Russians who came to the US.

Communism needed to be bolstered in the 1960s and 1970s because it was in fact failing economically to deliver. So Russia was desperate for legitimacy for communism as an economic theory.

Stanford’s SIEPR Agenda day looks the same way. Stanford made itself obviously part of this. The combination of Stanley Fischer and Khan Academy pointed back to Russia’s kompromat on Darrell Duffie and Stanley Fischer. This makes sense if Putin was putting his chips on the table to retake Ukraine and possibly the Baltic republics and others as well. Even Belarus may be absorbed in the West and then the rest in the South and East.

Many of the profs who have spread plagiarism and implicated their university, journals, the NBER, and government agencies may have been agent provocateurs for Russia. They should all be reconsidered in this light.

The above is hypotheses, speculation and opinion. This is draft and preliminary. Please restate as questions. Comments and corrections welcome. All other disclaimers apply.


Jerzy Los Econ Conferences Poland 1972 and 1974

April 10, 2014

At 2 conferences in Poland in 1972 and 1974, Russia may have been able to put pressure on profs from the West to nominate Soviet Kantorovich of the USSR for the 1975 Nobel Prize. This may have been taped and then played back for Andrei Shleifer in the 1990s. The pressure was over the plagiarism by Paul Samuelson, Stanley Fischer, and depending on interpretation Robert C. Merton, TN Srinivasan and David Levhari. Franklin Fisher had a relationship with David Levhari, was chairman of the SF thesis, on the RCM thesis and editor of Econometrica when Hakansson’s 1966 thesis paper was published in 1970.

The Russians then would have pressured Samuelson and Kenneth Arrow to nominate Kantorovich. They were uncles of Larry Summers. Summers’ parents may have helped arrange this. Srinivasan and Levhari were at Stanford when their paper replicating part of Hakansson came out in the 1960s after 1966 and published 1969. The others were at MIT.

Mathematical Models in Economics, Proceedings … Feb.-July 1972 and of the Conference on Von Neumann Models, 10-15 July 1972

Jerzy Los, Maria W. Los, Symposium on mathematical methods of economics, Warsaw, 1972, Conference on Von Neumann models, Warsaw, 1972, Instytut Matematyczny (Polska Akademia Nauk)
North-Holland, 1974 – 483 pages

http://books.google.com/books?id=eWFfygAACAAJ&dq=inauthor:%22Jerzy+Los%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UhpHU_qVBu7fsASBvYHgDg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAg

Computing equilibria: how and why : proceedings of the international conference organized by the Computing Centre of the Polish Academy of Sciences, held in Toruń, 8-13 July 1974

Jerzy Los, Jerzy Łoś, Maria Wycech-Łoś, Åke E. Andersson, Polska Akademia Nauk. Centrum Obliczeniowe
North-Holland Pub. Co. : sole distributor for the U.S.A. and Canada, American Elsevier Pub. Co., 1976 – Business & Economics – 332 pages

http://books.google.com/books/about/Computing_equilibria.html?id=Z720AAAAIAAJ

1972 Conference some of those there

Martin J. Beckmann

William Brock

Eugene Dynkin for Russia (contributed paper) now at Cornell then at CEMI Moscow

Koopmans (deceased)

Quang, Hung Le, from Hanoi

Valery Makarov now president New Economic School Moscow and Head of CEMI in same building.

Lionel. W. McKenzie

R. Tyrell Rockafellar

Martin L Weitzman then MIT now Harvard.

1974 Conference

Martin J. Beckmann

Eugene B. Dynkin

Lionel W. McKenzie

Quang Le Hung


US refuses to give Ukraine any military aid or intel Why? Kompromat?

April 9, 2014

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/08/exclusive-u-s-won-t-share-invasion-intel-with-ukraine.html

 

Others disagreed. “This is not an issue of means and methods and techniques,” Turner said. “This is straight up, almost Google Earth-type analysis. Even giving Ukraine (intelligence) about how best to utilize its forces against Russia would be beneficial.”

Turner added that Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States, Olexander Motsyk, told him last week that Ukraine still needed massive assistance from the United States. To date, the only military assistance the U.S. has agreed to send Ukraine has been the delivery of 300,000 Meals Ready to Eat (MRE) for Ukrainian forces in the field.

In light of the dire predictions for further Russian aggression against Ukraine, Turner is baffled that Obama has not done more. “Certainly if the Russians invade we would not want it to go well for them,” he said. “One way to ensure that is to give advice to Ukraine’s military on how to best respond to a Russian invasion. It’s unbelievable that we are not doing that right now.”

 

Is this the payoff of Russia’s kompromat on Stanley Fischer, Darrell Duffie, Larry Summers and others in the Obama or Clinton admin?  On their covering up?

Russia has been using plagiarism kompromat for decades to get atomic secrets, Nobel Prize nominations, build their academic network, extend their academic network into financial services, industry and government.  They used it to get IMF loans in the 1990s.

The universities covered this up in investigations from that of the FBI on Edward M. Corson to US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay to multiple background checks under Obama.  Some in the administration know this.  That is why they thought they could get Stanley Fischer in.

Now Russia is using this.  The Obama administration is signalling clearly to Putin it will stand by and give no assistance to Ukraine if Russia invades and takes all of it.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/21/u-s-eyes-russian-spies-infiltrating-ukraine.html

U.S. intelligence officials now say Russia’s Spetsnaz  are expanding into eastern and southern Ukraine, as well. The intelligence report from February assessed that Russian provocateurs would look to instigate low-level street brawls or “skirmishes” in eastern and southern Ukraine. The report also  predicted that Russia’s shadow warriors would seek to pay off Ukrainians to attend pro-Russian rallies and in general fan the flames of separatism. And since then, eyewitnesses say, that’s exactly what’s happened.

 

One U.S. official said the U.S. military intelligence analysts suspect elements of the 45th Spetsnaz regiment of Russia’s military intelligence service known as the GRU were conducting the provocations in Ukraine. On Thursday the White House added Igor Sergun, the 57 year old chief of the GRU, along with 19 others to a list of Russian officials sanctioned for the invasion of Crimea.

 

The above is hypotheses and speculation. This is draft and preliminary.  Please restate as questions.  Comments and corrections welcome.  All other disclaimers apply.

 

 


Moodys has pushed down credit rating of Ukraine earlier and more than S & P

April 9, 2014

Moody’s rating service has been pushing down the credit rating of Ukraine earlier and lower than has S & P.

Moody’s has Ukraine at Caa3 whereas S & P has it at CCC, which is above the Moody’s rating by one notch.  However, that notch is quite important.  Moody’s is rating Ukraine as default imminent with little prospect for recovery.

In local currency, Moody’s has Ukraine the same Caa3.  However, S & P gives it a B in its local currency.  These are extremely different.  Fitch tends to support S & P.  In almost every case, Moody’s has pushed Ukraine down earlier and more than S & P, especially in the local currency.

Moody’s

http://countryeconomy.com/ratings/ukraine

Click on Moody’s tab

Rating Moody’s Ukraine
Long Term Rating Short Term Rating
Foreign Currency Local Currency Foreign Currency Local Currency
Date Rating (Outlook) Date Rating Date Rating Date Rating
2014-04-04 Caa3 (Negative) 2014-04-04 Caa3
2014-01-31 Caa2 (Negative) 2014-01-31 Caa2
2013-09-20 Caa1 (Under Review) 2013-09-20 Caa1
2012-12-05 B3 2012-12-05 B3
2011-12-15 (Negative) 2009-05-12 B2
2010-10-11 (Stable) 2008-08-08 B1
2009-05-12 B2 (Negative) 2003-11-10 B1
2009-02-24 (Under Review) 2002-01-24 B2
2008-10-20 (Stable) 2001-11-20 Caa1
2008-08-08 B1 (Positive) 2000-01-05 Caa3
2008-03-28 (Under Review) 1999-02-22 Ca
2006-11-10 (Positive)
2005-02-17 (Stable)
2004-09-08 (Positive)
2003-11-15 (Stable)
2003-11-10 B1
2002-01-24 B2
2000-01-05 Caa1
1998-09-09 B3
1998-02-06 B2

 

Ukraine Ratings S & P

http://countryeconomy.com/ratings/ukraine#ratc1

Click on S & P tab

Long Term Rating Short Term Rating
Foreign Currency Local Currency Foreign Currency Local Currency
Date Rating (Outlook) Date Rating Date Rating Date Rating
2014-02-21 CCC 2013-11-01 B- 2014-01-28 C 2010-03-11 B
2014-01-29 CCC+ 2012-12-07 A- 2010-05-17 B
2013-11-01 B- (Negative) 2012-03-15 A+
2012-12-07 B (Negative) 2011-09-13 B+
2012-03-15 (Negative)
2010-07-29 B+ (Stable)

Fitch Rating

 

Long Term Rating Short Term Rating
Foreign Currency Local Currency Foreign Currency Local Currency
Date Rating (Outlook) Date Rating Date Rating Date Rating
2014-02-28 CCC 2014-02-28 B- 2014-02-28 C
2014-02-07 CCC 2014-02-07 B- 2014-02-07 C
2014-01-23 B- (Negative) 2014-01-23 B- 2014-01-23 B
2013-12-30 B- (Negative) 2013-12-30 B- 2013-12-30 B
2013-12-19 B- (Negative) 2013-12-19 B- 2013-12-19 B
2013-11-28 B- (Negative) 2013-11-28 B- 2013-11-28 B
2013-11-08 B- (Negative) 2013-11-08 B- 2013-11-08 B
2013-09-30 B (Negative) 2013-09-30 B 2013-09-30 B
2013-08-30 B (Negative) 2013-08-30 B 2013-08-30 B
2013-07-29 B (Negative) 2013-07-29 B 2013-07-29 B
2013-06-28 B (Negative) 2013-06-28 B 2013-06-28 B
2013-05-28 B (Stable) 2013-05-28 B 2013-05-28 B
2013-03-08 B (Stable) 2013-03-08 B 2013-03-08 B
2012-08-09 B (Stable) 2013-02-19 B 2013-02-19 B
2012-07-18 B (Stable) 2013-02-08 B 2013-02-08 B
2012-04-26 B (Stable) 2012-11-23 B 2012-11-23 B
2011-10-19 B (Stable) 2012-11-16 B 2012-11-16 B
2011-09-02 B 2012-10-08 B 2012-10-08 B
2011-07-21 B (Positive) 2012-09-27 B 2012-09-27 B
2010-07-06 B (Stable) 2012-08-09 B 2012-08-09 B
2010-03-17 B- (Stable) 2012-07-18 B 2012-07-18 B
2009-11-12 B- (Negative) 2012-04-26 B 2012-04-26 B
2009-02-13 B (Negative) 2011-10-19 B 2011-10-19 B
2008-10-17 B+ (Negative) 2011-09-02 B 2011-09-02 B
2008-09-25 BB- (Negative) 2011-07-21 B 2011-07-21 B
2008-05-14 BB- (Stable) 2010-07-06 B 2010-07-06 B
2006-10-25 BB- (Positive) 2010-03-17 B- 2010-03-17 B
2006-01-12 BB- (Stable) 2009-11-12 B- 2009-11-12 B
2005-06-08 BB- (Positive) 2009-02-13 B 2009-02-13 B
2005-01-21 BB- (Stable) 2008-10-17 B+ 2008-10-17 B
2003-06-25 B+ (Stable) 2008-09-25 BB- 2008-09-25 B
2002-03-26 B (Stable) 2008-05-14 BB- 2008-05-14 B
2001-06-13 B- (Stable) 2006-10-25 BB- 2006-10-25 B
2006-01-12 BB- 2006-01-12 B
2005-06-08 BB- 2005-06-08 B
2005-01-21 BB- 2005-01-21 B
2003-06-25 B+ 2003-06-25 B
2002-03-26 B 2002-03-26 B
2001-06-13 B- 2001-06-13 B

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating

 

Moody’s S&P Fitch rating description
Long-term Short-term Long-term Short-term Long-term Short-term
Aaa P-1 AAA A-1+ AAA F1+ Prime
Aa1 AA+ AA+ High grade
Aa2 AA AA
Aa3 AA- AA-
A1 A+ A-1 A+ F1 Upper medium grade
A2 A A
A3 P-2 A- A-2 A- F2
Baa1 BBB+ BBB+ Lower medium grade
Baa2 P-3 BBB A-3 BBB F3
Baa3 BBB- BBB-
Ba1 Not prime BB+ B BB+ B Non-investment grade
speculative
Ba2 BB BB
Ba3 BB- BB-
B1 B+ B+ Highly speculative
B2 B B
B3 B- B-
Caa1 CCC+ C CCC C Substantial risks
Caa2 CCC Extremely speculative
Caa3 CCC- Default imminent with little
prospect for recovery
Ca CC
C
C D / DDD / In default
/ DD
/ D
Credit rating agencies[edit]

Russia has kompromat on Darrell Duffie who is head of the MIS Committee of Moody’s.  Duffie also has interacted with persons in Europe close to Russia and more speculatively, Duffie may have helped with the Shiryaev book in 1999 which was meant to put pressure on Stanley Fischer for more IMF loans for Russia. Duffie has acted over 20 years as if he was an agent provocateur for Russia.  He has embedded misconduct on plagiarism that Russia can use or has used already throughout academia, government and industry.  He has pulled others into it and made them vulnerable or make them feeling that way.

Requests have been made to Stanford to investigate this.  Kenneth Singleton, John Shoven, Michael McFaul and the provost of Stanford have all been made aware of Russia’s kompromat on Duffie and Duffie’s position at Moody’s  in multiple emails. No response has been received on the substance.

The above is hypotheses and speculation.  Please restate as questions.  This is draft and preliminary.  Comments and corrections welcome.  All other disclaimers apply.

 


Why Putin feels this is the perfect time to retake Ukraine

April 8, 2014

Putin feels that now is the perfect time to retake Ukraine because he has so many factors that have come together.

  1. Victoria Nuland and the US put Ukraine in play by their interference in Ukraine.
  2. This is true for the Russian, Ukraine and foreign audiences.
  3. Obama is the weakest US president in history to Putin and the Kremlin.
  4. Obama is also weak in the eyes of Europe and Ukraine itself.
  5. Obama’s team radiates corruption including at the Federal Reserve.
  6. Snowden has created weaknesses in the alliance.
  7. Snowden also created distrust between the US government and population.
  8. The American people realize the government is primarily watching them.
  9. The US is dominated by oligarchs who use immigration to keep wages down and jobs uncertain.
  10. The nomination of Stanley Fischer has given Putin almost perfect kompromat on Obama as well as on DOJ and FBI.
  11. The use of plagiarism kompromat started under Stalin, whom Putin admires.
  12. Darrell Duffie at Moody’s overseeing the credit ratings of Russia, Ukraine, US, etc. is also a major factor.
  13. Duffie, possibly working for Russia, has also implicated many institutions widely in plagiarism kompromat and misconduct.  This has created substantial potential financial liability for ratings misconduct litigation.
  14. The appointment of Stanley Fischer who plagiarized Nils Hakansson at Berkeley also implicates Janet Yellen and others at the Fed.  Jeremy Stein may have left because of this.
  15. There are other econ profs in and out of government who are linked to this.
  16. The Stanley Fischer kompromat links the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations.
  17. Other countries appear to have used it such as India and Pakistan to get benefits related to lifting sanctions on their nuclear programs.
  18. Putin models himself on Stalin as a great and strong leader.
  19. Stalin took Poland and the Baltic States while using plagiarism kompromat to get atomic secrets.
  20. Victoria Nuland the neocon types want to expand NATO and the EU into Ukraine.  This would be deep in Russia.
  21. This would allow the spread of Western influence and corrupting ideologies of PC, Diversity and Multiculturalism.
  22. Putin can flip a danger deep inside Russia to putting Russia back on the edge of Europe.
  23. This is what Stalin would do.
  24. It is also what former greats would do such as Catherine, Peter, and the Ivans.
  25. The biggest weakness of the US is financial and Russia’s kompromat is deeply embedded into the US financial, academic and regulatory system.  It is far more than just Duffie and Stanley Fischer.
  26. The expert witness firms for DOJ Antitrust Division Economic Analysis Group and similar regulatory profs are also linked to this as at least going along.
  27. That in turn casts doubts on the FBI, CIA and NSA as keeping silent to this over many years.
  28. The public has no trust for DOJ, FBI, CIA or NSA.  Nor for the Fed, SEC, Treasury, FTC, DOJ Antitrust, etc.
  29. Nor do they trust the universities anymore.  They are gauging them on inflation and are disloyal to the American middle class on know-how transfer to other countries including China that Americans consider a rival and enemy.
  30. The universities and tech sector have humiliated America by transferring its tech production to other countries making the military supply chain dependent on China.  America depends on Russia for its space program.
  31. Thus the US government is weak and has broken faith with its own people.
  32. Russia’s advantages including kompromat match the weaknesses of the US government.
  33. If Putin hesitates, the US, EU, and IMF can try to rebuild Ukraine and make it an agent of influence deep in Russia to spread hostile propaganda and networks.
  34. Putin also remembers that Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers were both agents of corruption and undermining post Soviet Russia.  He doesn’t trust them and any administration that employed them.
  35. The DOJ and FBI have tolerated open obstruction of justice by Harvard and MIT in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay and subsequent background checks.
  36. Russia knows LTCM and DE Shaw traded their bonds using insider information on kompromat and that DOJ and FBI have let them get away with.
  37. Russia has real contempt for the integrity and competence of the organs of the US government and society.
  38. They know they have to take their chance when it comes or they will face the turn of the wheel of fate.
  39. The neocons and Victoria Nuland types will be at Russia’s throat to destroy it as a people of Russian ethnicity if they can.  So this is a struggle for survival of the Russian and even Slavic Orthodox people.
  40. Putin sees the West as genuinely diseased as a culture and society that spreads decay and intends to spread it through Ukraine to Russia.
  41. Putin will cement his place in history if he retakes Ukraine.
  42. Putin is old KGB and believes that kompromat such as he has on Stanley Fischer, Darrell Duffie and others is what works.  He finds he understands America and that gives him confidence to defeat it at a moment of weakness.
  43. This is also a unique opportunity to undermine the expanding NATO.   Putin knows he has this chance just once.
  44. The corruption and cover up extend far beyond Obama or the executive branch. The two parties, the Congress and even parts of the media are corrupt.
  45. Putin has seen the information and evidence of the kompromat and the obstruction of justice by Harvard and MIT and Stanford put on the internet, sent to journalists, posted on media webpages.
  46. Throughout this the FBI and DOJ and SEC have ignored it. This shows America is morally corrupt.
  47. To Putin as an old KGB hand, the corruption of FBI and DOJ is of special importance.  If even the FBI is corrupt and incompetent, it shows to Putin that he can act safely and take the chance history has given him.
  48. The FBI and DOJ acquiescence  to the obstruction of justice in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay and then actual rehiring of known criminals and liars such as Larry Summers and Stanley Fischer after their crimes were exposed on the Internet is of especial importance to Putin as an old KGB hand and having living through these times.
  49. The Stanley Fischer nomination, his obvious concealment to the Senate hearing, the posting of the truth on webpages and the FBI and DOJ ignoring it prove to Putin the total corruption of the US.
  50. Stanford SIEPR Day of paying Stanley Fischer 100k the day after the Senate hearing where he concealed info on this proves the corruption of the US government and society.
  51. The people in these institutions, including FBI and DOJ, obviously don’t care.  They are apathetic to open lies and corruption.  They fail to investigate or to follow up.  They are morally degenerated by the moral degeneracy of American society.
  52. Not only do US institutions lie, but obvious networks of Russian spies linked to the New Economic School Moscow are inside the Federal Reserve itself as well as major universities and financial institutions.  The FBI does nothing.  To Putin this type of apathy shows perfect degeneracy of America.
  53. Thus Putin can seize the moment and take Ukraine and the Baltic states.  This will undermine NATO and stop its expansion.
  54. This will also start a counter movement of an expanding bloc under Putin that can expand in Asia possibly around the world.

 

The above is hypothesis speculation and opinion. This is draft and preliminary.  Restate as questions. All other disclaimers apply.


Moodys downgrades Ukraine while Russia has kompromat on Darrell Duffie

April 8, 2014

http://rt.com/business/moody-ukraine-downgrade-default-545/

Moody’s Investors Service has downgraded Ukraine’s government bond rating one notch from Caa2 to Caa3, citing the current political crisis and deepening economic instability as reasons for its negative outlook.

The Caa rating is a credit risk grading pertaining to investments that are both very poor quality and entail a high credit risk. The current downgrade drops Ukraine from Moody’s “extremely speculative” rating to “default imminent with little prospect for recovery.”

Moody’s said the downgrade was driven by three factors, which “exacerbate Ukraine’s more longstanding economic and fiscal fragility.”

Some comments

B.F. 07.04.2014 07:15
Oh my goodness, now who would have expected this to happen !!! The US and EU instigate a coup d’etat in Ukraine, and Russia gets back the Crimea. Now the shocked US and EU have found themselves in a position to financially rescue the very goons they put into power, and ofcourse they dont have the money to do so. And the Ukranians ? Pensions cut by 50 %, wages cut up to 70 % and energy expenses raised by 100 %. The population is slowly going into a state of shock, while the goons turn on each other. Things did not go as planned, now did they ? No looting of Russia, but plenty of expenditures on Ukraine. My goodness !!!

DS 06.04.2014 23:37
You can be sure the West, especially the US, is pressuring Moody’s. But wait…which way? Collapse so we can rescue them, or no collapse so the people won’t see what foolish dic.s we were to overthrow their only chance to survive? Hmmm.

“dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript” site:.ru

“dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript” site:.ua

Russia has posted the above kompromat document on Darrell Duffie, Stanford prof and head of Moody’s MIS committee.  The above document helps prove that Duffie copied the paper of a 3rd party to insert into the Stanford 2000 Ph.D. thesis of Jun Liu now at UCSD.

More detail about this here.

 

http://ir.moodys.com/governance.cfm

 

Director since October 2008

Darrell Duffie, Ph.D., age 59, is Chairman of the MIS Committee and is a member of the Audit and Governance and Compensation Committees of the Board of Directors. He is the Dean Witter Distinguished Professor of Finance at Stanford University Graduate School of Business and has been on the finance faculty at Stanford since receiving his Ph.D. from Stanford in 1984. He has authored books and research articles on topics in finance and related fields. Dr. Duffie is a member of The Federal Reserve Bank of New York Financial Advisory Roundtable, and the Board of The Pacific Institute of Mathematical Sciences and is a Fellow and member of the Council of the Econometric Society and a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. He is Chairman of the Market Participants Group on Reference Rate Reform.  Dr. Duffie served as a trustee of iShares Trust and a director of iShares, Inc. from 2008 to 2011 and was President of the American Finance Association in 2009.

 

Repeated emails have been sent to various persons at Stanford asking Stanford to investigate this and to tell Moody’s and the Securities Exchange Commission. These have received no reply.  These are to professors aware of this and also to administrators.  Stanford is stonewalling telling Moody’s, the SEC and investors.

The above is draft and preliminary.  Please restate as questions.  Comments and corrections welcome.  These are hypotheses and speculation on issues of public interest.  All other disclaimers apply.


Legal liability of Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Moodys for Russia wars in Ukraine

April 7, 2014

The universities Stanford, MIT, Harvard and their partners like Moody’s and investment banks have financial liability for Russia’s actions in Ukraine.  This is because the universities had prior knowledge that their actions had helped Russia advance its ends, and they knew that their current actions would have that effect as well.  They did it anyhow knowing the consequences of helping Russia advance its war agenda in Ukraine.

Prior times the universities helped Russia that they know about and further arguments are given below.

  1. Russia used plagiarism kompromat to help gain atomic know how.  An example is the Fock Letter about plagiarism by Corson.  That was in 1947, the start of the Cold War and while Fuchs was still giving atomic know how to Max Born assistants in England and Scotland.
  2. The universities withheld info about the Fock Letter from MI5 and the FBI following the arrest of Klaus Fuchs and the investigation of Edward M. Corson by MI5 and the FBI.
  3. The universities nominated Soviets for the Nobel Prize in physics and economics because Russia had kompromat on the universities including plagiarism kompromat but also university involvement in covering up atomic spying.
  4. The universities nominated Kantorovich for the Nobel Prize in econ in 1975 based on plagiarism kompromat Russia had on Paul Samuelson, Stanley Fischer, Robert C. Merton (and he was the son of Robert K. Merton), and David Levhari and TN Srinivasan.  This was done at MIT and Stanford and a Harvard journal was instrumental in its involvement.  They were the group that duplicated different parts of Hakansson’s work before its delayed publication in 1969 and 1970.
  5. The universities nominated Peter Kapitsa in 1978 for the Nobel Prize in physics.  Kapitsa started plagiarism kompromat for Russia in the 1920s.  Kapitsa founded MIPT, Phys Tech which is the school that Sergei Guriev got one of his degrees in the 1990s with a thesis on portfolio theory ie the same subject as the Hakansson work that was pilfered by MIT and Stanford.
  6. Boris Berezovsky reused this kompromat in the 1990s on Larry Summers, nephew of Paul Samuelson, and Stanley Fischer at IMF to get IMF loans.  These were then diverted in Loans for Shares.  This funded Yeltsin and led to the rise of Putin who was picked by Berezovsky to succeed Yeltsin.
  7. The universities thus stopped Russia’s chance of real democracy.
  8. The IMF loans funded the 2nd Chechen war in 1999 in the view of Chechens and thus funded what Chechens consider the Chechen genocide.
  9. Russia continued to have this kompromat in the 2000s.
  10. Putin appears to have decided that the 2nd Obama administration would be a time of maximum weakness.
  11. Obama had hired Larry Summers in 2009 after DE Shaw, one of the trading firms that traded Russian government bonds in the 1990s using this know-how it appears had paid Summers 5 million a year.
  12. Harvard at that point had concealed info from the USAO Mass and FBI in the investigation from 1997 to 2005 in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.
  13. During that time, Hay who had a law degree from Harvard, was given a Ph.D. in math by the Steklov Institute in Moscow in case he lost his law license it appears.
  14. Obama covered that up for his university allies and appointed Summers and others complicit in this history such as Janet Yellen and Ben Bernanke as well as Jeremy Stein most likely.
  15. Putin thus felt he had maximum advantage over Obama in the second administration and that he could use this to take back Crimea.
  16. The universities have assisted in this by concealing information from the FBI and other parts of government including Federal Reserve Board, Securities Exchange Commission, US Treasury, DOJ Antitrust Division Economic Analsysis Group, FTC, Senate, House, etc.
  17. SIEPR Agenda Day at Stanford March 14, 2014 was the payment of 100,000 to Stanley Fischer the day after Fischer concealed information about this from the Senate on March 13, 2014 in his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee.
  18. This gave Russia leverage during the Crimea Crisis.
  19. This has also set up Russia to invade the Eastern part of Ukraine and possibly other areas as well.
  20. The universities have been advised throughout this period by emails of Russia’s use of these tactics and of Russia’s past benefits from using them.
  21. The universities are aware of their own coverup and that Russia is on the march in Crimea.
  22. The universities are aware that the Obama sanctions are weak and ineffective.
  23. The universities and their partners are thus aware that they are helping Russia advance its agenda by war in violation of international law.  That includes a resolution by the UN General Assembly against Russia’s invasion of Crimea in violation of international law.
  24. Russia’s actions are undermining the credibility of NATO.  NATO is the most important organization for the stability of the current international regime and was developed out of experience of two world wars and the Cold War.
  25. The universities are providing material assistance to Russia to undermine the credibility of NATO by giving Putin leverage over Obama.
  26. This set of actions by the universities thus exposes them to legal liability for the consequences.
  27. The universities are aware of the damage as each damage is inflicted, e.g. invasion of Crimea, but persisted in their actions even after that.
  28. Stanley Fischer’s testimony March 13, 2014 and SIEPR Agenda Day at Stanford March 14, 2014 were after Russia invaded Crimea.
  29. These were intended to coverup and to intimidate witnesses including Federal Reserve Board employees from providing information to the FBI, Congress or even their superiors on these matters.
  30. One of the FRB employees was at New Economic School Moscow and has a 2 year gap in their resume for 1997 and 1998, years of Project 97-03 and of putting pressure on Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers for more IMF loans.
  31. Stanford knew that before, during and after SIEPR Agenda Day March 14, 2014.
  32. Stanford intended to coverup Russia’s use of plagiarism kompromat to get IMF loans in the 1990s and to intimidate the New Economic School employee at the Fed from telling what they know to their superiors, Congress and the FBI.
  33. Thus Stanford and MIT as well as Harvard and their partners intentionally acted to help Russia and cover up Russia’s use of these methods directly during the Crimea Crisis.
  34. This was an act with malice by Stanford, MIT and their university partners.
  35. MIT and Stanford acted to involve Leon Panetta, Condoleezza Rice and others in SIEPR Agenda Day to try to implicate them and thus implicate Obama and the GOP as well in these actions.
  36. Stanford knew this would help Russia substantially to prosecute its ongoing invasion of Crimea and of Ukraine.
  37. Stanford knew this and did this while NATO was being undermined and while the UN was condemning Russia’s invasion as a violation of international law.
  38. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_68/262
  39. The vote was 100 to 11 with 58 abstaining.
  40. Stanford and MIT have intentionally undermined this resolution by the payment of the 100,000 to Stanley Fischer and not withdrawing the award to him.
  41. The award to Stanley Fischer covered his IMF period when he gave Russia IMF loans to cover up not just plagiarism but the universities more extensive role in atomic spying than the FBI knew of in the 1990s while many involved were still alive.
  42. Russia linked them in the Sudoplotov book intended to push the buttons of the atomic scientists in order to pressure the econ profs at IMF and US Treasury to give them IMF loans.  This worked.
  43. Moreover, the profs and Ph.D.s at LTCM and DE Shaw traded Russian government bonds to benefit from this.  That included Robert C. Merton at LTCM as well as Myron Scholes who won the Nobel Prize in 1997.
  44. They in turn got nominations from Paul Samuelson and others involved.
  45. The Nobel Prize has been used in this way almost continually.  The prize to Peter Diamond was while he was before the Senate and MIT, Harvard and Stanford were still concealing this information from the FBI.
  46. The universities have full liability for the Ukraine and Crimea Crises.  This includes all the costs of the US, NATO, the suffering of the Ukraine People, and the losses to investors in Ukraine, Russia and elsewhere.
  47. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/04/07/ukraine-gunmen-seized-building/7410151/ “The seizure of government buildings in East Ukraine by pro-Russian separatists is being orchestrated by Moscow to create an excuse for military invasion like Crimea, Ukraine’s prime minister said Monday.”

The above is speculation and hypotheses.   This is draft and preliminary Please restate as questions.  All other disclaimers apply.


Karl Shell Darrell Duffie Stanley Fischer Moodys Senate Banking Committee

April 5, 2014

The nomination of Stanley Fischer to be vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve has a very serious problem.  If the Senate goes ahead and confirms it faces the problem that not only did Stanley Fischer plagiarize Nils Hakansson in 1969 based on the Hakansson thesis available at MIT from Karl Shell in 1966, but Darrell Duffie used a paper provided by a 3rd party to Karl Shell in the Jun Liu thesis at Stanford in 2000.

Duffie it appears knew of the earlier situation with Karl Shell and Stanley Fischer.  Moreover, Franklin Fisher was suitemate with Karl Shell at MIT in the 1960s and Franklin Fisher was chairman of the Stanley Fischer Ph.D. thesis at MIT and on the Robert C. Merton committee and was the chief editor of Econometrica in 1969 and 1970 when the Hakansson paper was published after delay and likely a referee who was involved.  That referees name should be obtained by investigators.

Duffie then used that information as leverage over Karl Shell possibly to then use the 3rd party paper to insert into the Jun Liu thesis at Stanford in 2000.  That paper was an improvement over the Hakansson Fischer Merton Samuelson papers in the 1960s and early 1970s.

If the Senate confirms Fischer, then it faces this entangled situation.  Stanford, MIT, Cornell, Univ Calif San Diego, U Cal Berkeley and other universities and Elsevier and other journals are involved.  It only takes one of them to do an investigation and conclude that there was plagiarism in either case to unravel the entire thread.  There are other cases and other universities and other professors and other witnesses.

Duffie is head of the MIS Committee of Moody’s and has extensively interacted with federal agencies on a large variety of matters and testified to Congress. He too is a public person.  Moreover, Russia has posted the document, “Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory” “Provisional Manuscript” on webpages in Russia. China, India and Iran have all done so as well.

Duffie “Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory” “Provisional Manuscript” 

If the Senate proceeds to confirm the Stanley Fischer nomination it then faces multiple investigations by universities and journals. Some of these are not in the US.  Other countries governments may also decide to investigate since these are linked to Russia’s activities in their countries from before World War II.  Also to China’s activities.

There are many Russians and Chinese at universities in the US and UK and other allied countries including Canada and Australia.  So if the Senate proceeds to confirm Stanley Fischer they face having the investigation continue in the US and in other countries.

Fischer’s time at the IMF can be investigated by other countries that have witnesses inside their borders.  Thus the Senate would be foolish to confirm Stanley Fischer.  This needs to be explained to them by the FBI and DOJ as well as other agencies such as CIA and NSA.

Nor does it stop there.  There are multiple other cases and individuals they have not even heard of and more universities and journals, many in other countries to investigate them too.  It is impossible to contain it.  Moreover, Russia and China both know this.  Putin is determined to use it or lose it. So he will go big and go soon.

The above is draft and preliminary.  Comments and corrections welcome.  Please restate as questions.  All other disclaimers apply.

 


Did Stanley Fischer, Stanford SIEPR Day and Moodys Leverage help Russia take Crimea?

April 4, 2014

How much did the nomination of Stanley Fischer, Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day giving Fischer 100,000 dollars and Russia’s leverage on Stanford professor Darrell Duffie and thus Moody’s help Russia take Crimea?  Russia took Crimea because it was confident that its world view was correct and that it had leverage over the US decision makers and the West to get away with it.   Putin is an old KGB colonel and if the world is going his way in the old way he understood it, then he is confident to take Crimea while he has leverage over the US and the West.

How much in sanctions can the West impose on Russia?

The following article says not much.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-to-think-about-russia-and-the-ukraine-crisis/

By now, Germany, the UK, France, Italay, Canada, and other countries like Poland, Sweden and other former Warsaw Pact countries are aware that Russia used plagiarism kompromat on Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers (via his uncle Paul Samuelson) to help get IMF loans in the 1990s for Russia. They also know that Harvard, Shleifer, Summers, Fischer, etc. covered that up in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.  They know that the upper levels of DOJ are complicit in this cover-up, as are other parts of the US apparat including CIA and NSA.

Furthermore, Dominique Strauss Kahn likely used this information to engage in sexual harassment at the IMF and other professors at Stanford and elsewhere have also likely used the plagiarism kompromat to engage in sexual harassment.  Larry Summer’s comments that women are not good in math at the NBER was directed at female econ and law profs who knew of this, that if they came forward they would lose their NBER grants.  NBER fronts for grants in law and economics from the federal government so that the university legal entities don’t see the grant directly from US government. Instead, the NBER does and the universities charge NBER fees for use of their facilities in the grant.  This immunizes the universities or so they hope from penalties from using NBER grants as payments to coverup and for silence during FBI background checks or investigations like US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.

Russia is aware of this.  Larry Summers was appointed without Senate approval, but nonetheless rehired, by the US government in 2009.  That was after it was public on the Internet that Russia had used this and that Summers, Shleifer and Harvard covered this up.  DE Shaw had hired Summers and paid him 5 million a year.  They had traded Russian government bonds during the 1990s and may have known of Russia’s kompromat on Summers and Stanley Fischer at that time.  LTCM also likely did and traded on it.

These firms and others including Federal Reserve and FRBNY are part of this circle of kompromat.  Moreover, New Economic School Moscow now has an employee at Federal Reserve in Washington as well as at universities and likely financial institutions.   So the kompromat network is much broader and deeper.  Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day with Stanley Fischer and Sergei Guriev was intended to frighten Federal Reserve board employees from Stanford and from New Economic School Moscow to keep quiet.

Stanford Professor Michael McFaul was US ambassador to Russia.  During the entire time he was ambassador the Duffie document that has kompromat on Duffie, Stanford and Moody’s was posted on websites in Russia.  Putin treated McFaul with contempt.  This is part of Putin’s contempt for Berezovsky and KGB need to prove he is smarter than profs like Berezovsky in manipulating and controlling profs like McFaul, Duffie, Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers.

Obama is from University of Chicago which hired Stanley Fischer after his plagiarism at MIT and knew of the plagiarism at at the time. University of Chicago helped coverup Russia’s use of plagiarism kompromat to get atomic secrets.  The use of plagiarism kompromat in econ was going on full blast at University of Chicago in the 1990s when Obama was a lecturer there.  The main cases of plagiarism in the 1990s involved University of Chicago directly or indirectly.

Bernanke’s thesis didn’t cite the Stanley Fischer papers but did cite the Paul Samuelson plagiarism paper but not the Nils Hakansson papers that were plagiarized by Stanley Fischer and Paul Samuelson.  Olivier Blanchard was coauthor with Stanley Fischer of a graduate textbook citing only the Samuelson plagiarism paper and not Nils Hakansson. Blanchard is now chief economist of the IMF.   Others at Federal Reserve are involved.

There are profs and Ph.D.s at major investment banks who know of this or who are involved in some of the plagiarism or going along with it.  They get ratings benefits from Moody’s and regulatory benefits from the Federal Reserve including low interest rates and low credit spreads.  They then fund both parties political campaigns.  This just got easier with the Supreme Court ruling lifting yet more limits on campaign finance contributions from the wealthy and connected, claiming there was no evidence of corruption presented by DOJ.  The reason being that DOJ is part of the corruption that exists of this type.

Because of DOJ complicity, Putin feels he has complete leverage on the apparatus of the state in the United States.  Putin controls the reputation of DOJ itself since it has allowed itself to become part of this.  Thus Putin as a KGB colonel feels he really has the organs of state security and prosecution under his kompromat leverage, not just a few econ profs.  He also has the Federal Reserve, at least one ratings agency, the IMF and other financial institutions that benefit from their silence and complicity.

SIEPR Agenda Day on March 14, 2014 was one day after Stanley Fischer’s testimony to the Senate Banking Committee that did not admit to this history.  This was directly during the Ukraine Crimea crisis.  Russia knew of Fischer’s appointment well in advance of its takeover of Crimea that started in late February 2014.  Moreover, Ukraine has indicated it considers the Russian FSB to be implicated in the sniper fire that immediately led to the Crimea Crisis.

At the point that Russia took over Crimea in late February and early March 2014, Stanley Fischer was concealing info from Senate Banking Committee and the public and Stanford was paying him 100,000 to do so.  This helped Stanford cover up its potential liability from Moody’s ratings benefits not just for Russia but for investment banks involved and the securities they trade and underwrite.  This includes the new generation of subprime mortgage derivatives.  Thus Stanford could be liable for trillions of dollars of losses.  So could other university partners such as Harvard and MIT, University of Chicago, Princeton, Cornell, Moody’s and investment banks.

These are the institutions that make large campaign contributions and that control the upper echelon of the Federal Reserve, SEC, FTC, DOJ Antitrust Division, and other agencies of government and regulation.  Thus Putin really does have the hidden or not so hidden kleptocracy under his kompromat umbrella.

As pointed out above, this gave Putin the feeling that he understood America’s elite and its government’s higher echelons and that he could control their reaction to his taking Crimea.  Putin was reinforced in seeing that things were the same as during the days of the Soviet Union, if not more corrupt in America.  So Putin was able to move freely in Crimea.  He felt he understood the world and that the situation was safe for him to take advantage of.  So he took Crimea without any fear.

So far, Russia has escaped serious consequences.  It has also gained in credibility and respect. The US and NATO have lost respect and confidence even among their own peoples.  In Putin’s view, this is because he has kompromat on the US and European establishments.  Plagiarism, academic, financial, regulatory and government kompromat all come together for Putin to give him leverage and insights into the US and European establishment as well as IMF and the financial institutions.

The above is speculation and hypotheses.  Please restate as questions.  Comments and corrections welcome. All other disclaimers apply.


Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day Stanley Fischer Khan Academy Jumps the Shark

March 29, 2014

On Friday March 14, 2014, Stanford University hosted the SIEPR Economic Summit 2014 Agenda.

http://siepr.stanford.edu/SIEPR.Economic.Summit.2014.Agenda

This day honored Stanley Fischer and Salmon Khan of Khan Academy.

We can search on these two as search strings in quotes at the same time.

“Stanley Fischer” “Khan Academy”

We can do this search for prior to Jan 1, 2014 so we eliminate some of the results for after SIEPR day itself was announced with these two honorees.

“Stanley Fischer” “Khan Academy” Jan 1 2012 to Jan 1 2014

The result of this is to give hits exclusively to a certain blog.  Some other stray hits arise because of social media feeds that make older pages appear to relate to this content, but that is a reflection of SIEPR day itself and came later.

“Stanley Fischer” “Khan Academy” limited to a certain blog NMDR Jan 1 2012 to Jan 1 2014

We find results like

Stanford Misconduct at NMDR

Kaspersky Red October virus and Aaron Swartz Denial of Service Attack MIT

Several more related posts in January 2013 at NMDR are indexed here

Jan 2013 at NMDR

Stanford Misconduct

Stanford Professor J. Darrell Duffie

Moody’s

And so on.

These relate to discussion of

  1. Possible plagiarism by Stanley Fischer of Nils Hakansson
  2. Possible plagiarism by J. Darrell Duffie using a working paper that extends the Hakansson Merton results in a Stanford Ph.D. thesis of 2000 by Jun Liu.
  3. Russia’s use of these.
  4. That Russia can use these to pressure Duffie, Stanford or Moody’s for ratings benefits.
  5. That other countries can piggy back on this such as Iran or China.

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript” site:.ru

 

subscribe.ru/archive/science.exact…/19121202.htmlTranslate this page

Dec 19, 2005 – 16.12.2005, Duffie D. Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory (provisional manuscript). 16.12.2005, Pilgrim M. Dive into Python. 16.12.2005, Tan W.M. …

Mexmat is the Department of Mechanics and Mathematics at Moscow State University. Albert Shiryaev is a professor there. He published a book in 1999 on mathematical finance that likely had help from professors in Europe. Shiryaev was in Zurich in 1997 to 1999.  Duffie visited Zurich in 1997.

Iran has since posted the document if it was not already posted.

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript” site:.ir

At link location pad.um.ac.ir/file/view/371774

India

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript” site:.in

And China

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript”

http://www.soudoc.com零点花园经济之星经济学资源

bbs.pinggu.org/forum.php?mod=viewthread

Feb 24, 2008 – 4 posts – ‎4 authors

中译:动态资产定价理论作者:Darrell Duffie 版次:2001 格式:pdf … 附赠:本书手稿,1999. Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory(Provisional Manuscript).

And so on.

The blog NMDR also joined the critique of Khan Academy with hashtag MTT2k

#MTT2k at NMDR

As mentioned above, searches show this blog NMDR was the only place that mentioned Stanley Fischer and Khan Academy in a meaningful way prior to January 1, 2014. It critiqued both Stanley Fischer for plagiarism, Khan Academy and the role of Russia in this.

Sergei Guriev who was at the SIEPR Day worked at New Economic School Moscow and had a Ph.D. in portfolio theory from MIPT, Phys Tech, the university that Peter Kaptisa set up. Kapitsa started Russia’s kompromat on plagiarism in the 1920s and used it to help get atomic secrets.  The universities concealed that from the FBI in the Klaus Fuchs, Edward Corson, and J. Robert Oppenheimer investigations.

So why did Stanford give an award to Khan Academy and Stanley Fischer and so focus attention back to the blog NMDR and these entries on Stanley Fischer and Duffie and Russia’s possible use of their possible plagiarism to get benefits. Those include IMF loans from Stanley Fischer and possibly rating benefits from Moody’s via Duffie and Stanford?

Why would Stanford raise these together and focus attention back to the blog NMDR?

  1. Taunt the blog in some way?
  2. Tell Khan Academy to copy the work on Peano Axioms at the blog NMDR the same way Stanford plagiarized the same person in the Jun Liu thesis under Duffie and the same way that MIT plagiarized Nils Hakansson in the Samuelson and Fischer papers.
  3. Send a message to professors who know of the Stanley Fischer plagiarism not to tell the FBI, Senate or Federal Reserve about it?
  4. Same message to Ph.D.s at Federal Reserve or Federal Reserve Banks or investment banks.  They depend on academic publications for promotion even at Fed Reserve.
  5. Tell the same groups not to provide information to the FBI, Moody’s, Securities Exchange Commission, Senate Banking Committee about the possible pressure on Duffie, Stanford and Moody’s.
  6. Pressure the author of the blog NMDR not to provide information to these.
  7. Mock the Senate Banking Committee as too stupid to figure this out.
  8. Mock the FBI as too stupid to figure this out.
  9. Mock the Department of Justice as too political or too corrupt to proceed in this case.
  10. Mock DOJ and FBI for not having discovered Russia’ use of plagiarism kompromat to get atomic secrets.
  11. Mock DOJ and FBI for not figuring Russia used this to get IMF loans in the 1990s.
  12. Mock DOJ and FBI for being deceived by Harvard and MIT in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.
  13. Mock DOJ and FBI for being deceived in numerous federal background checks from the Atomic Bomb Project in WWII to the Stanley Fischer nomination.
  14. Mock DOJ and FBI for not understanding that Aaron Swartz may have been trying to use JSTOR to expose some of this.
  15. Mock DOJ and FBI for not understanding that Russia’s warning about Chechens before Boston Bombing was tied to Chechen resentments against Harvard and MIT and Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers over the IMF loans to Russia in the 1990s that funded the Chechen War.
  16. Send a signal to Stanley Fischer that his 100,000 dollar payment from Stanford was for him to use his influence at Federal Reserve to keep Ph.D.s at Federal Reserve from telling this to the FBI or DOJ.
  17. Frighten Russians in the US and UK who are at US universities and even at Federal Reserve not to tell this to the FBI or DOJ.
  18. Tell Stanley Fischer that is his job.
  19. Tell the Fed employees that Stanley Fischer is there to keep them quiet.
  20. Tell professors at universities that Stanley Fischer is controlling this at Fed and they are safe to keep quiet about it and not tell FBI or DOJ.
  21. Tell employees at financial institutions the same.
  22. Tell all of these people that financial institutions can get Mood’s rating benefits the same as Russia for securities they trade or underwrite if they keep the game going.
  23. Tell employees of US government, universities, and investment banks they can get publications, citations, grants, awards, etc. for going along with this and not telling the FBI or DOJ.
  24. Emphasizing that the universities got away with this in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay so they can get away with it for the Stanley Fischer nomination.
  25. The best way to convince employees of Federal Reserve Board, universities, Moody’s, investment banks, etc. that they can get away with this and it is safe not to tell the FBI, SEC, FRB, Senate is to mock the abilities of the FBI, SEC, FRB, DOJ, and Senate to uncover this from the 1940s to the present.
  26. SIEPR Day by giving 100k to Stanley Fischer the day after he concealed info on this from Senate Banking Committee and by extension as far as profs know from the FBI and SEC and DOJ mocked them.
  27. By creating the search Khan Academy Stanley Fischer to a webpage that explained it all by someone they know is a victim of this plagiarism, they further mock the FBI, SEC, DOJ and Senate who could contact that person but apparently did not.  This shows to employees of US gov, Moody’s, universities and investment banks that the FBI, DOJ, SEC, and Senate are lazy and apathetic and can’t even do Internet searches or follow up on them.
  28. Over the years the universities, Russian intelligence and others can point out that this has been on Internet for years and FBI, DOJ, SEC, Senate did nothing about it.  That then proves they don’t have to tell them and it won’t do any good to.
  29. SIEPR Day itself and the Stanley Fischer Khan Academy are intended to be used by Stanford, MIT, Harvard, the investment banks, and Russian and Chinese intelligence to show them years from now when the FBI, DOJ, SEC, Senate have still done nothing and Stanley Fischer is appointed that they are paper tigers who can be ignored and it does no good to tell them anyhow.
  30. Thus the NMDR pages exposing Duffie, Stanford, Moody’s, MIT, Harvard, Russian intelligence, etc. do not hurt them but actually help Stanford et al.  This is why Stanford created the search link to the NDMR pages precisely so they can prove to the witnesses that it is safe to conceal this from FBI and deceive them if questioned and that it will achieve nothing to tell them, except that the person who does will have their career harmed as happened to the NDMR blogger and to Nils Hakansson.

Given that the SIEPR Day was the day after Stanley Fischer concealed information on all of this from the Senate Banking Committee, the public, Moody’s and anyone watching from SEC, we can infer that it was not targeted at the blogger NMDR or Khan Academy but to those who could provide information to the FBI and DOJ, in and out of government, to keep quiet and that it was safe to do so.

Stanford wanted to tell Federal Reserve employees that despite the Stanley Fischer plagiarism and Russia’s use of it being on the Internet since 2006 and the Duffie and Moody’s explained since 2012 and the Russian document since 2005, that the FBI and DOJ could continue to be fooled on these matters into the future and everyone who went along would profit.  They also point out that the blogger NDMR who exposed this was not getting rewarded and the same would happen to anyone who spoke up as to NMDR. Furthermore, if they spoke up, the FBI and DOJ would ignore them anyhow, so they would lose their career and the DOJ, FBI and SEC would do nothing about it anyhow.

Stanford thus intended to delay, impede or obstruct witnesses on all these matters from coming forward to the FBI, DOJ, SEC, and Senate Banking Committees.  This was an act of Stanford not of the individual professor J. Darrell Duffie who does not even run SIEPR.  That also sends the message to all these people that the coverup is bigger than Duffie it is institutional to Stanford and all the Stanford faculty who know of this stand behind the obstruction.  This is a hypothesis.

Note this also comes with the crisis with Russia which started with the Boston Bombing, the firing of CIA agents who reported to Stanford Professor Michael McFaul while ambassador to Russia in 2013 and the Ukraine and Crimea crises.  McFaul was appointed ambassador from Stanford in 2011. The Duffie document was already posted by Russia in 2006. Stanford failed to tell that to the Senate in McFaul’s confirmation or to the FBI in the McFaul background check.

 

Moody’s rates tens of trillions of dollars of securities. If Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Princeton, Cornell, University of Chicago, Elsevier Science, Moody’s and related investment banks are found liable for losses of systematic good ratings, then they would all go bankrupt.  They would be ruined and likely the individual professors as well in investor lawsuits.

The above is hypotheses and speculation.  Please restate as questions.  All other disclaimers apply.  This is draft and preliminary. Comments and corrections are welcome.  This is subject to revision.  Please include the disclaimers in any reference to this page.

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.