Bullying and plagiarism by profs are same thing in Russia Plagiarism Files

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6805567.ece

The court heard that Houghton had waged a string of verbal and physical attacks on Miss Moore since the pair were 14 and District Judge Bruce Morgan told her: “Since Emily Moore was 14 you have waged compelling threats and violent abuse towards her.

“Bullies are by their nature cowards, in school and society. The evil, odious effects of being bullied stay with you for life. On this day you did an act of gratuitous nastiness to satisfy your own twisted nature.”

Houghton, of Malvern in Worcestershire, had two previous convictions relating to her vendetta against Miss Moore. In 2005 she was convicted of assaulting her as she walked home from school and was subsequently expelled.

The bullying makes no sense at one level, but make sense in other contexts.  The bully does it out of habit and the way they are, whether by nature or nurture.  Society then lets them get away with more and more and doesn’t treat it as the real harm it is.  Note the method of pretending they are the friend described in the article.  This approach is common in academia and elsewhere.

Paul Samuelson plagiarism “public good”

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i1_7521.html

Edmund Phelps, Insider-Economists’ Insider

Introduction by PAUL A. SAMUELSON

Thus, my much-cited 1969 paper on optimal intertemporal portfolio programming opportunistically used the Bellman-Beckman-Phelps recursive techniques to analyze what defines the best qualitative asset-portfolio mix of the Phelps 1962 aggregate saving. It was not plagiarism but it was horning in on a created public good there for the taking.

No it wasn’t.  It was Nils Hakansson’s Ph.D. thesis at UCLA.  It was not a public good for horning in.  Paul Samuelson got an NSF grant for his horning in.

http://www.hakansson.com/

http://www.hakansson.com/nils/Dissertation.pdf

MIT had the thesis by 1966 because a professor there, Karl Shell, chaired the session at which Hakansson presented it.  It was one of the top theses of all time in economics and caused a sensation in the profession.  It was not a public good at all.  Public good has an ironic meaning when Samuelson get an NSF grant for his 1969 “horning in”.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/04/09/prof-summers-a-lesson-from-prof-bernanke/

By David Wessel

Asked about the economics of implementing a cap-and-trade approach to climate change at an Economic Club of Washington event today, White House economic adviser Larry Summers deliberately sought to avoid saying anything newsworthy. Instead, he cited a Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ph.D. thesis written in 1979 by a then-young economist named Ben Bernanke, now, of course, chairman of the Federal Reserve.

http://news-libraries.mit.edu/blog/bernanke-thesis-available/156/

Bernanke cites the Samuelson 1969 paper in his thesis.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/29839/05915220.pdf;jsessionid=F6535BEB64E73E0150C398D6A48A8B55?sequence=1

Page 149 of thesis cites Samuelson but in the citations, Hakansson does not appear.

Stanley Fischer in his 1989 textbook credits Samuelson 1969 and mentions Hakansson not at all.

Hypothesis:

The bullying described by the judge is exactly how Paul Samuelson, Stanley Fischer and the others at MIT treated Nils Hakansson from 1969 to present.  They have bullied him repeatedly.  The judges words describe Paul Samuelson’s actions towards Nils Hakansson.  The others went along with it.

This is what gave Russia leverage over Larry Summers to get the low interest rate loans fro the IMF.  This is why LTCM and other hedge funds bought Russian government bonds, based on their knowledge of this history of bullying.  It was bullying in printed publications of the major institutions of society which control the credentials of the elites which made it far more harmful than Facebook.

Nils Hakansson was not even made a Fellow of the Econometric Society.  So many at MIT in 1969 were made Fellows even though they did nothing of comparable worth.

http://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/russias-plagiarism-files/

Hypothesis:

Summers is still continuing the bullying.  But now he is trying to intimidate those who know from coming forward.  Summers is also bullying Assistant US Attorney Sara Miron Bloom not to investigate what is now on the Internet.  Summers is doing this with Obama’s knowledge very likely.  This includes bullying and intimidating the staff of DOJHQ, Federal Reserve, US Treasury, FBI, etc.  They are all being bullied by Summers and Obama and Nation of Cowards Attorney General Eric Holder.

http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_61/iss_9/47_1.shtml

Thomas C. Reed September 2008, page 47

One important “pupil” who paid Fuchs an early visit was Qian Sanqiang. In 1959 Qian was the designated mastermind of Mao’s A-bomb program. In July of that year, Qian made his way to East Germany, where he met with Fuchs at length. (H. Terry Hawkins, now a senior fellow at Los Alamos, told Stillman in 2006, “I read this report in an unclassified publication, that this meeting took place shortly after Fuchs returned to East Germany. Fuchs gave Qian information that greatly assisted the Chinese program.” Also see http://www.oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/category/klaus-fuchs.) During those long summer days of 1959, Fuchs gave Qian a full tutorial on the design and operation of Fat Man. In all likelihood, he also added his thoughts on the role of radiation pressure in thermonuclear weapons.

Holder, Obama and Summers know AIP has linked to this blog on this.  They know they are facing investigation for this.  They are using bullying to keep the DOJ staff and FBI staff from investigating this.

Joel Brenner talk mentions Russia’s intense effort towards end.

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2007/03/29/HP/A/6196/ABA+Speech+on+Counterintelligence+Threats.aspx

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN29426639

“But he said Moscow appears less interested in U.S. commercial and military technology than other countries”

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10785968

http://nationalstrategy.com/Programs/NationalStrategyForumReview/SpringSummer2009NSFROnlineJournal/FeatureEssayEconomicandIndustrialEspionage/tabid/189/Default.aspx

http://www.ncix.gov/publications/speeches/ABAspeech.pdf

The above is all hypotheses and should be restated as that if not already.  This is speculation.  Comments and corrections welcome.  This is draft and preliminary.  All other disclaimers apply.

Ron Paul on IMF Russia Loans 1999

http://www.house.gov/paul/committeework/bankingtrans/99_9_22.htm

Ron Paul’s statement:

Given that the IMF claims not to know what happened to the money and admits that the Russian central bank lied to them, we should not allow the IMF to hide behind the shallow defense that there is no evidence of wrongdoing. When using taxpayer funds, we must demand a higher standard: IMF, World Bank and U.S. Treasury officials should provide evidence that no public funds were siphoned off and that no officials profited from the conversion of the high-yield Russian GKO bonds into dollars just days before the default or from other public funds.

..

In the (Russian) St. Petersburg Times (“Skuratov Says IMF Billions Sold on the Sly,” September 17, 1999), Russian Prosecutor General Yury Skuratov charged in an interview that the IMF money funded profitable insider trading. He quoted from a memo President Yelstin refused to accept, “An analysis of the Central Bank�s use of the account where the IMF stabilization loan was deposited showed that $4.4 billion was sold from that account between July 23, 1998 and August 17, 1998. Of that money, $3.9 billion was sold directly to Russian and foreign banks, bypassing the trading session at the Moscow Interbank Currency Exchange.” He claimed only $571 million went to support the ruble.

I am concerned that Treasury Secretary Larry Summers cites Anders Åslund, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, given his controversial views on the benefits of encouraging bribery! He clearly states in his article “Russia�s Collapse” in the current issue of Foreign Affairs, “As Andrei Shleifer of Harvard and Robert W. Vishny of the University of Chicago have observed, the best way of fighting corruption is encouraging competition in bribery [emphasis added]. August�s financial crisis was a logical outcome of the oligarchs� war, as they tried to maintain their high and dubious incomes by any means. In the end, the Russian state could no longer deliver enough cash to satisfy their ravenous appetites. The crash radically reduced the amount of money that could be made on the state–and thus the power of the corrupt businessmen.”

George Washington University professor Janine Wedel has warned about the appearance of corruption surrounding Andrei Shleifer heading the Harvard Institute for International Development (“The Harvard Boys Do Russia,” the Nation, June 1, 1998) and the effects of collusion in her book Collision and Collusion: The Strange Case of Western Aid to Eastern Europe 1989-1998. It seems the best course for avoiding any perception problems would be more transparency of the activities of U.S. officials.

One possible scheme in August 1998. Russia gets the 4.8 billion IMF loan in dollars. Then the banks in Russia sell the dollars to oligarchs for rubles. The oligarchs borrow rubbles from a bank in Russia. Then they devalue the rubble by defaulting on Russia’s debt.

Then they take part of their dollars and buy the rubles they borrowed and use that to pay back their ruble loan. If the ruble has fallen by half, they pocket half of the 4.8 billion, i.e. 2.4 billion dollars and now owe nothing.

Whether this is what happened or not is something that can be investigated further. But the Bush administration has not cooperated with Switzerland to investigate the 1998 or other transactions by oligarchs. Clinton pardoned Marc Rich. Bush Clinton together again.

It was in October 1998, during the Clinton impeachment that Clinton signed the law to make regime change in Iraq the goal of the US. That was pushed by PNAC which had Paul Wolfowitz as a member. Jacob Wolfowitz, Paul’s father died c.1981.

But Jacob Wolfowitz may have told his son Paul of academic kompromat Russia may have used in the 1970′s to try to pressure Nobel Prize nominations for Kantorovich from Arrow and Samuelson, uncles of Larry Summers. Summers with Stanley Fischer was in control of loans to Russia from the IMF in the 1990′s. This included possible plagiarism by Stanley Fischer in Fischer’s 1969 Ph.D. thesis at MIT. Paul Samuelson was on Fischer’s Ph.D. committee and also got an NSF grant for himself for a paper that may also have been plagiarism. Samuelson around 2003 said it wasn’t plagiarism.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/bank/hba51201.000/hba51201_0.HTM

Search: oligarchs Leach Russia 1998 default

If the oligarchs set up the above scheme to profit from the 4.8 billion, they profited from the loss by LTCM. LTCM bought Russian bonds in August 1998. LTCM had academics who know of the above history including the possible use by Russia of academic kompromat in the 1970′s to pressure Nobel Prize nominations by Paul Samuelson and Kenneth Arrow. Robert C. Merton was at LTCM and he got an NSF grant in 1969 as part of the same work at MIT as Samuelson got an NSF grant. This duplicated in part, the work of Nils Hakansson already circulated in 1966 in a completed UCLA Ph.D. thesis still in process of being published. The main paper was delayed in publication to fall 1970, just after Merton’s MIT thesis was accepted under Samuelson. The Merton NSF grant paper from 1969 was part of this MIT thesis.

Boris Berezovsky got his Ph.D. in math at Moscow State University. He then worked at the Institute of Control Sciences in the USSR. That institute did the same math as in all the above papers and as in the work done by Kantorovich for the 1975 Nobel Prize in economics. Berezovsky was the top oligarch in Russia that got the loans from Fischer and Summers.

Putin became head of FSB in summer of 1998. He would have gotten a cut of the 4.8 billion money trading scam outlined above, if it happened. Berezovsky and Yeltsin would not make Putin president of Russia if he had not personally profited from the scheme, if it happened that way. Thus Putin is part of this continuing cover-up. That is one reason he has to stay in control of Russia. There have been investigations in the U.S., Switzerland and even Russia.

When Bush Gore went to the Supreme Court in 2000, the USAO Mass was still investigating Harvard. At that point, the Clinton team may have been withholding information from the investigation. The Bush team including John Yoo from Berkeley, where Nils Hakansson is a prof, may have known that and told Scalia to get Scalia to give the presidency to Bush. They may also have told Gore not to fight it in Congress. This may be why Gore didn’t run in 2004 or 2008.

Marc Rich was involved with Russia from the 1980′s. Libby got him his pardon from Clinton after Bush v. Gore in 2001. Then Bush said don’t investigate the pardon to Republicans in Congress. When Bush said he looked into Putin’s eyes and saw his soul, he may have been thinking about all this. Libby, of course, got his pardon from Bush in 2007.

Putin is now to be Prime Minister of Russia, again. Yeltsin and Berezovsky made him that in the 1990′s before Putin became president and after Putin was head of FSB during the August 1998 transactions. Hillary Clinton wants her White House records closed as does baby Bush from Daddy Bush onwards for Bush Clinton Bush.

One reason the PNACons may attack Ron Paul, is that if he became president, he could investigate them for all the above including use of information about this in 1998 to get Clinton to sign onto regime change in Iraq. They should have exposed Russia’s activity, not used it to advance their own, if that happened. Even if Paul is not elected, just his visibility would let him raise the same issues he did in 1999 and refocus the need to investigate the neocons.

We now have a new attorney general, not Alberto Gonzales. The new AG may not be himself liable in any of this, whatever he may have heard. Thus the neocons are at greater risk now than they have been in years of this coming out.

Under Gonzales the DOJ was not supportive of investigations in Switzerland or perhaps even by USAO Mass to pursue this. Now this has the potential to change. They may hope that Romney with a Harvard MBA and JD may not want to have all this investigated. Or they hope Hillary is elected.

==Further point

In summer of 1998, Long Term Capital Management, LTCM, bought Russian government bonds because it thought that Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers would have to bail out Russia. But instead the oligarchs including Putin had Russia default, although they did try for a bailout. The above scheme could have been reversed if they had needed to, and they had plenty of funny money ruble holdings to make money on if the ruble went up.

Putin got a Ph.D. in economics in the 1990′s. It was shown this was plagiarized and probably written by someone else anyhow. Berezovsky had a Ph.D. in math from Moscow State University. This is considered by Russians the top math department in the world. Russia’s bonds were registered bonds, although LTCM used Bear Stearns for clearing its trades. Russia would have known from the registrations that Bear and thus LTCM had holdings in Russian bonds. So by defaulting on the bonds, Berezovsky and Putin would make the geniuses at LTCM who won the Nobel Prize in economics in 1997, Myron Scholes and Robert C. Merton, lose money. This would prove that Putin and Berezovsky were better economists and traders than Scholes, Merton and the rest at LTCM. This would show they were smarter than them. In 1997, Scholes and Merton and LTCM got tremendous press as geniuses far above normal Nobel Prize winners.

For the Russians showing they were smarter would be very important. Berezovsky had wanted to win a Nobel Prize when he worked at the Institute of Control Sciences in the USSR. This was his way of showing he was smarter than Scholes, Merton and the rest at LTCM. The very transactions that would make Berezovsky billions would lose LTCM billions. In fact, LTCM went under. Berezovsky and Putin had proven they were the smart ones.

The same score keeping would continue. By getting Clinton to sign the Iraq Liberation Act while USAO Mass investigated Harvard and some Clinton team profs perhaps as well, the PNAC profs like Paul Wolfowitz proved they were the smart ones. Paul Wolfowitz had no achievements of the stature of his father Jacob in academic terms. Jacob contributed to some of the more important results in this overall area of math, operations research, or control sciences as the Soviets called it. Paul proved he was as smart as his father by using this to get the Iraq Liberation Act.

Then during Bush v. Gore, Paul Wolfowitz, John Yoo and George W. Bush could prove the same thing by using this to influence Scalia. Scalia could then prove he was the smart one to issue an opinion on why the Supreme Court issued a stay of vote counting in Florida. Gore had to leave. But Gore has proven he was the smart one by making a lot of money and winning his own Nobel Prize. These Nobel Prizes seem to have a lot of meaning to those who win them and those who don’t but can prove they are smarter than those who win them.

Since Scholes and Merton were smarter than most Nobel Prize winners in econ, at least in their own opinion and many others, including the press at the time, by making them lose money and at the same time making money, Putin and Berezovsky proved they were smarter than all the Nobel Prize winners.  Since they were smarter than Scholes and Merton, who in turn were smarter than the others, that meant Putin and Berezovsky were smarter than all the others.  Of course, if they were exposed, the world might not think that.  So they have to keep this under wraps. As do Bush, Gore, Harvard, etc.
Above is all speculation and hypotheses. Restate as questions. All other disclaimers apply. This is draft and preliminary. Corrections or comments are welcome.

Gonzales Resigns Questions for Chertoff if AG

The following questions are for Michael Chertoff. Note these are questions not assertions. All assertions should be restated as questions. All other disclaimers apply.

1. Does Russia keep files on plagiarism by profs in the US?
2. Does that include possible plagiarism by Stanley Fischer in his 1969 MIT Ph.D. thesis and Paul Samuelson in a 1969 MIT NSF grant.
3. Samuelson is the uncle of Larry Summers.
4. Did Russia use this to pressure Nobel Prize nominations from Paul Samuelson and Kenneth Arrow, uncles of Larry Summers in the 1970′s for Kantorovich of the USSR?
5. Did this happen in part at an economics conference in Warsaw in 1972? There are living persons from that conference such as Martin Beckmann.
6. Larry Summers and Stanley Fischer had control over IMF loans to Russia in the 1990′s. Did Russia use this information to pressure them?
7. Did Harvard or the Clinton admin conceal this information from the USAO Mass investigation of Harvard from 1997 to 2005? This was led by Assistant US Attorney Sara Bloom.
8. Did Condoleezza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, or John Yoo know this and use it to get the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998 or to influence Scalia in Bush v. Gore, or to influence Gore to give up and go away quietly?
9. Was an agreement reached by George W. Bush and his staff as non-federal employees prior to Jan 20, 2001 to conceal this information from the FBI and Senate in nominations and from the USAO Mass investigation?
10. Did George W. Bush and others form an agreement as non-federal employees prior to Jan 20, 2001 to allow Russia to continue its network of academics or others in the US?
11. At this point, did George W. Bush and others become effectively linked to actions of the Russian government against the United States and become part of a conspiracy against the United States prior to Jan 20, 2001 as non-federal employees?
12. Did Michael Chertoff become aware of this agreement at some time?
13. Did Michael Chertoff fail to notify Congress of this in any prior nomination of Michael Chertoff?
14. Did Michael Chertoff fail to notify Congress or act on this as an employee of the DOJ or DHS?
15. Did Alberto Gonzales join this possible conspiracy at some point?
16. Was the firing of US attorneys intended to further this conspiracy, and to further Russia’s ability to keep its network in the US intact?
17. Did other nations, such as China, India, Pakistan or Mexico learn of this method of Russia in the 1940′s or 1950′s and then realize that Russia had reactivated this method in the 1990′s to get IMF loans?
18. The USAO Mass investigation became public in 1997. In 1998, India and Pakistan did nuclear tests. Did they realize the Clinton team by 1998 had already concealed information from the USAO Mass investigation? Were they using that to do their nuclear tests?
19. In August of 1998, al Qaeda hit US embassies. Was Pakistan relying on its information on the Clinton administration to get away with its support of al Qaeda?
20. Did Harvard, the Clinton administration and others become accessories after the fact to Pakistan’s support of al Qaeda?
21. Did they become accessories before the fact as Pakistan continued its support of the Taliban and al Qaeda from August 1998 to present?
22. Did Bush and his team form an agreement prior to Jan 20, 2001 that they would not hinder Pakistan in its support of al Qaeda as part of furthering a conspiracy to use this information to gain the presidency or influence the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore or influence Gore not to protest in the Senate, an official act, or during the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act effort?
23. After the 9-11-2001 attacks, did Bush’s team in a meeting with Pakistan’s General Ahmed of the Pakistan ISI allow Ahmed to use this record to get money from the U.S. and lifting of sanctions for its nuclear program, as well as get away with its support of al Qaeda and the Taliban and Afghanistan?
24. Was this in furtherance of a possible conspiracy formed prior to Jan 20, 2001 as non-federal employees?
25. Has Bush given India its nuclear deal to keep India from exposing this? Is not Manmohan Singh a former Indian intelligence officer who reverse engineered this for India prior to becoming PM?
26. Did not Mexico through ITAM and Marcos Moshinsky learn of the 1947 Physical Review Fock Letter, Vainshtein publication in 1969/1970 Matekon and other acts of Russia?
27. Did Bush give Mexico benefits including illegal immigration and a proposed amnesty and legal family reunification as part of keeping them quiet?
28. Was Michael Chertoff prior to recent enforcement actions, giving Mexico a hands off policy on illegal immigration as part of this possible conspiracy to keep them from exposing it?
29. Did Paul Wolfowitz learn of this from his father Jacob Wolfowitz as to events prior to Jacob’s death in 1981?
30. Did John Yoo learn this from Berkeley econ/J.D. profs, including one who clerked for Scalia in the 1990′s?
31. Did Scalia and other justices learn of this from econ Ph.D./J.D. clerks from the same universities that are involved?
32. Has Russia used this to sell arms to Iran including Sunburn anti-ship missiles intended to sink US carriers which carry over 5000 men and women each?
33. Was this not allowed by Bush and his team as an act in furtherance of their possible conspiracy?
34. Does Iran know this? Has Iran used this to get away with its support of the insurgency and killing of US men and women in Iraq?

This is opinion, hypotheses or speculation. All assertions should be restated as questions. All other disclaimers apply.

WaPo: “Russia Seeks More Control At Academy Of Sciences”

=Original WaPo Article:

“Russia Seeks More Control At Academy Of Sciences”

By Peter Finn
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, March 13, 2007; Page A01

“MOSCOW — The historic autonomy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which has pioneered fundamental research in Russia since its founding by Peter the Great three centuries ago, is under threat from government proposals to bring the institution under much tighter state control and end its academic…”

“This is really a war,” Alexander Nekipelov, vice president of the academy, said in an interview at the institution’s august administrative headquarters, a czarist palace on Moscow’s Leninsky Prospekt. “I am sure we are going to win it, but of course we cannot help being worried by the situation.”

Members of the academy, which in 1980 defied Soviet demands that it expel dissident physicist Andrei Sakharov, view the plan as part of a broader trend of increased official control over key parts of Russian society.

==

The Academy of Sciences helps Russian intelligence analyze plagiarism and the interplay between academic and political corruption in the West. This started with Kapitza analyzing plagiarism by Dirac and Niels Bohr being made a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1926 to keep quiet about it. Rutherford was president of the Royal Society and his son-in law Fowler was helping Dirac.

==

Putin became head of FSB in July 1998 and may have gotten in on looting a 4.8 billion IMF loan. This may have involved kompromat on US econ profs Stanley Fischer at IMF and Larry Summers at US Treasury.

Russia may have had academic kompromat files on them for decades including possibly plagiarism by Fischer in his 1969 Ph.D. thesis at MIT in which Samuelson the uncle of Summers was involved.

Putin may want to control the academy because his money comes from it and because Berezovsky and Yeltsin were using this in the 1990′s to get IMF loans. Putin’s participation in this scheme is how he became President of Russia.

Thus the Academy is key to the truth about how he got his money and his power. They have reputation control to expose this and he wants control over them to keep them under control. The above is all speculation and a hypothesis.

==

quote During Soviet days, the academy also repeatedly denied membership to leading Communist Party members on grounds that they lacked scientific credentials. end quote.

quote In November 1945 refused to work on nuclear weapons development under Beria, and in 1946 was dismissed from his posts as director of the Institute for Physical Problems and head of Glavkislorod, and resided at his country house until after Stalin’s death and Beria’s arrest in 1953. He conducted there original research on high-power electronics. In January 1955 Kapitza returned to the post of director of the Institute. end quote RAS bio on Kapitza.

http://kapitza.ras.ru/history/PLKapitza/main.html

Beria sent him a shotgun as a present, but Stalin let Kapitza live and stay at his house. One book says Kapitza should have been killed for what he did. Kapitza lived a long time until 1984.

Kapitza’s was Rutherford’s assistant in 1925 and knew of the plagiarism and coverup including making Bohr a Fellow of the Royal Society.

This gave Kapitza and the Acad of Sci USSR independence of the Party. Even in the 1980′s, they had this as leverage over Teller and Bethe, both of whom didn’t tell this when Fuchs was arrested or at the Oppenheimer security hearings in April 1954. Born the victim got the Nobel in fall 1954.

==

c. 1994, Sudoplatov refers to Kapitza in his book as Rutherford’s assistant. This is what got Bethe and the others scared to denounce the Sudoplatov book, not just the accusations on Oppenheimer, Fermi, and Szilard.

It was in 1995, they got the big IMF loans from profs Fischer and Summers. They were using the accusations on the physicists to scare the econ profs into giving them money. In Russian physics journal(s), they also pushed Kapitza to remind the Americans.

Putin got in on this with Berezovsky and Yeltsin in 1998 as head of FSB when they got more IMF loans and stole them for themselves. Because the Academy has used its knowledge since 1946 to be independent, even against Stalin and Beria, Putin has to get control over them now before the presidential election where he turns over power.

Putin wants to keep his money and keep the Academy from using this as leverage for its own benefit, as it has in the past. Even in the 1930′s, during the purges, Kapitza used this to demand Landau be released from prison. So Putin is trying to control this independence that the Academy has used even under Stalin from its keeping the plagiarism files on US profs. The above is all speculation.

==
“Members of the academy, which in 1980 defied Soviet demands that it expel dissident physicist Andrei Sakharov,”

Kapitza was alive and still a witness against Bethe and Teller. Teller was a key person in SDI in the 1980′s which gave Kapitza leverage until 1984 to protect Sakharov.

==
Comments WaPo

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2007031201603

read more | digg story

Above is all speculation and hypotheses.  All statements should be restated as questions.  All other disclaimes apply.

The Right Way to Manage U.S. Attorneys

“The actions of an appointed U.S. attorney must be totally off-limits to questions from the White House or anyone in Congress.” from Abbe David Lowell Saturday, March 10, 2007; Page A19.

A discussion of whether Bush is trying to influence the Tom Delay, Jack Abramoff, and Libby investigations or to intimidate Assistant US Attorney Sara Bloom at the USAO Mass from reopening the Harvard investigation follows. This are in response to the article by Abbe Lowell on the US Attorney firings.

==

The following is all hypotheses and speculation. All statements should be restated as questions. All other
disclaimes apply.
Comments at WaPo

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2007030901752&start=1

==

Assistant US Attorney Sara Bloom of USAO Mass is the real target of intimidation? Because Russia used kompromat to get loans from Clinton admin and Bush knew thay by the time of Bush v. Gore? In July 1998, Putin became head of FSB and Russia got another 4.8 billion in IMF loans.

But the money was taken from the bank accounts of the Russian govt to the personal accounts of the leaders. (Note the IMF disputes this in part and had an audit done and claimed equivalent amounts of money from other Russian government controlled accounts were used.) So the Russian government defaulted on Russian govt debt in Aug 98 since the money was not in the govt bank accounts.

Russia 4.8 billion IMF site:imf.org

Russia 4.8 billion IMF

A discussion of some of the IMF Russia and Asia transactions that is more technical is here.

Two professors, Larry Summers and Stanley Fischer had control over the IMF loans to Russia. Putin and the oligarchs and FSB had decades of files on academic kompromat some of it linked to Fischer’s 1969 Ph.D. thesis and an NSF grant involving Paul Samuelson, Summers’ uncle.

The KGB in 1972 at an econ conference in Warsaw may have used this incident and others to try to pressure Samuelson and Arrow, also uncle of Summers to nominate Kantorovich of the USSR for the Nobel in econ.

This was all possibly hid from USAO Mass from 1997 to 2005 by Clinton admin and then Bush. Did Bush use it during Bush v. Gore to make Gore go away? Gore turned down the presidency of Harvard. Did Marc Rich know this? Libby and Wolfowitz? Jacob Wolfowitz likely knew of the 1969 and 1972 incidents.

The above is speculation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn//comments/display?contentID=AR2007030901752&start=1⊂=AR

Job Offer to Stanley Fischer from Putin in 2001:

http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/bwi-wto/imf/2001/russiaimf.htm

quote Russia Restores Ties with IMF BBC News June 19, 2001 For his part, Mr Putin complimented Mr Fischer, who plans to step down from his IMF role before the end of the year. He also offered him a job. We are always glad to see you in our country, said Mr Putin. If you would like to move from the IMF to Moscow, we can look at various options. end quote.

Putin likely got in on the July 1998 4.8 billion pot of money. So he was protecting his money at this point. After Fischer was hired by Israel in Jan 2005, Putin did an arms deal with Syria and then Iran. Israel and Bush kept quiet. The SVR and FSB are professionals at intimidation. Follow the money. Follow Putins money.
==
search “In Honor of Edmund S. Phelps ” plagiarism

quote Thus, my much-cited 1969 paper on optimal intertemporal portfolio programming opportunistically used the Bellman-Beckman-Phelps recursive techniques to analyze what defines the best qualitative asset-portfolio mix of the Phelps 1962 aggregate saving. It was not plagiarism but it was horning in on a created public good there for the taking. end quote Paul Samuelson.

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7521.html

from Preface Knowledge, Information, and Expectations in Modern Macroeconomics:
In Honor of Edmund S. Phelps
Edited by Philippe Aghion, Roman Frydman, Joseph Stiglitz, and Michael Woodford. Its on line.

Note the text was removed from above link after being posted with this link.

But it can be seen with Google inside:

http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0691094853

If you type the word plagiarism into the search, you get part of the passage quoted above.  Click on page 1 and scroll down.  This link brings it up:

http://books.google.com/books?id=5yC9Z5q6NmkC&pg=PA1&vq=plagiarism&sig=pyJGziu75ir5psgGewgQai61M1c

Fischer’s thesis was part of the same 1969 events. Samuelson and Merton got NSF grants for their 1969 papers. But it was already in part in the 1966 Nils Hakansson Ph.D. thesis that MIT had a copy of in 1966. Fischer got his US citizenship from his thesis. Above is speculation.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0691094853/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-8618326-6380625#reader-link
==
search Wolfowitz site:nobelprize.org

Engle Nobel autobio shows Jacob Wolfowitz, Paul’s father was part of this small world in 1969.quote I took Kiefer’s probability and Wolfowitz’s statistics. I was extremely happy. … We married on August 10, 1969. On that day, I turned in my dissertation, received my Ph.D. and we left Cornell for good to take my first academic job at MIT. …
… Many of my students from that time have gone on to do quite well themselves: Larry Summers, …
Frank Fisher, Bob Solow, and Jerry Rothenberg encouraged me to join them on a new project to build a model of the city of Boston. …end quote.
quote Robert M. Solow – Autobiography
So, in 1949-50, I spent a fellowship year at Columbia University, in the lectures of Abraham Wald, Jacob Wolfowitz and T.W. Anderson, along with my fellow … end quote. Solow Nobel Prize autobio.

Solow was on one of the Ph.D. committees of Merton and Stanley Fischer at that time. This was one little world and Russia knew this to use it at the 1972 Warsaw econ conference to pressure Arrow and Samuelson to nominate Kantorovich of the USSR for the 1975 Nobel Prize in economics. Above is speculation.

==

Paul Wolfowitz was Jacob Wolfowitz’s son and signed the 1998 PNAC letter to make regime change in Iraq part of US goals. Clinton was impeached in fall of 1998 and signed the Iraq Liberation Act in October 1998. At the same time there were hearings into IMF loans for Russia, LTCM bailout, etc.

Robert C. Merton was part of LTCM which bought Russian bonds in Aug 98 betting the IMF would have to bail Russia out. But the money was put into the personal bank accounts of the leaders so it wasn’t there to pay Russia’s bonds, so it defaulted. LTCM went belly up and Congress investigated why the Fed helped arrange a bailout.

The USAO Mass had already started investigating Harvard and Russia and Clinton profs like Larry Summers in spring 1997. If Jacob Wolfowitz had revealed this at that time, Clinton might have been removed from office and this would have become part of the ongoing investigations of Clinton more closely. This could be used again during Bush v. Gore, the USAO Mass was still investigating, in fact to August 2005. The above is all speculation.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2003/engle-autobio.html

==

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/30/AR2005123001480_pf.html

The DeLay-Abramoff Money Trail
Nonprofit Group Linked to Lawmaker Was Funded Mostly by Clients of Lobbyist

quote Two former Buckham associates said that he told them years ago not only that the $1 million donation was solicited from Russian oil and gas executives, but also that the initial plan was for the donation to be made via a delivery of cash to be picked up at a Washington area airport.

One of the former associates, a Frederick, Md., pastor named Christopher Geeslin who served as the U.S. Family Network’s director or president from 1998 to 2001, said Buckham further told him in 1999 that the payment was meant to influence DeLay’s vote in 1998 on legislation that helped make it possible for the IMF to bail out the faltering Russian economy and the wealthy investors there.

“Ed told me, ‘This is the way things work in Washington,’ ” Geeslin said. “He said the Russians wanted to give the money first in cash.” Buckham, he said, orchestrated all the group’s fundraising and spending and rarely informed the board about the details. Buckham and his attorney, Laura Miller, did not reply to repeated requests for comment on this article.

The IMF funding legislation was a contentious issue in 1998. The Russian stock market fell steeply in April and May, and the government in Moscow announced on June 18 — just a week before the $1 million check was sent by the London law firm — that it needed $10 billion to $15 billion in new international loans.

House Republican leaders had expressed opposition through that spring to giving the IMF the money it could use for new bailouts, decrying what they described as previous destabilizing loans to other countries. The IMF and its Western funders, meanwhile, were pressing Moscow, as a condition of any loan, to increase taxes on major domestic oil companies such as Gazprom, which had earlier defaulted on billions of dollars in tax payments.

On Aug. 18, 1998, the Russian government devalued the ruble and defaulted on its treasury bills. But DeLay, appearing on “Fox News Sunday” on Aug. 30 of that year, criticized the IMF financing bill, calling the replenishment of its funds “unfortunate” because the IMF was wrongly insisting on a Russian tax increase. “They are trying to force Russia to raise taxes at a time when they ought to be cutting taxes in order to get a loan from the IMF. That’s just outrageous,” DeLay said. end quote

By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 31, 2005; A01

search Russia IMF july 1998 site:washingtonpost.com

http://www.nationalbanken.dk/C1256BE9004F6416/side/Report_and_Accounts_1998/$file/kap08_01.htm
==

If Russia was bribing Tom Delay, they weren’t using academic kompromat at the same time? This was a big time operation of the Russian goverment to get these IMF loans. They were bribing Tom Delay through Jack Abramoff and at the same time there were pressuing Larry Summers at US Treasury and Stanley Fischer at IMF based on the academic kompromat trail that stretches back to the 1920′s and includes the same methods used to help gain atomic know-how.

Putin was head of FSB in July 1998. This was partly his operation. That is why he became President of Russia, he was part of this. That’s why Berezovsky and Yeltsin trusted him.

They were pushing all buttons at once and that didn’t just include bribing Tom Delay but also pushing academic kompromat buttons. That was while USAO Mass was investigating Harvard from 1997 and questioning Summers on his relationship to Shleifer.

Paul Wolfowitz and the neocons knew the Clinton profs and Harvard were concealing this history from the USAO Mass investigation. They got the Iraq Liberation Act during the Clinton impeachment. Then used this during Bush v. Gore to influence Scalia and then make Gore go away. Scalia has had econ Ph.D./JD clerks from the schools involved from the 1990′s to now. The links are all over the place. The above is speculation.

==

Bush is trying to intimidate the investigation of Tom Delay and Jack Abramoff, of Marc Rich, and of other investigations that may link to this. Bush is trying to keep Assistant US Attorney Sara Bloom from reopening the Harvard investigation into whether Bush’s team knew this in 1998 and formed a conspiracy to keep this information from USAO Mass and use it to pressure Clinton admin figures for the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act and then later during Bush v. Gore. Above is speculation.

==

Bush was not a US government employee prior to Jan 20, 2001. Nor were the others during these incidents. If they formed an agreement as non US government employees to keep this information from the USAO Mass office, that was a conspiracy to obstruct justice and to conceal espionage by Russia against the United States. That is what this is about. That is why they put into the Patriot Act that they could appoint interim US Attorneys. They had this problem from before 9-11. The above is speculation.

read more | digg story

The above is all hypotheses and speculation. All statements should be restated as questions. All other disclaimes apply.

Milton Friedman Lost Witness on Russia’s Plagiarism Files

“SAN FRANCISCO — Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist who advocated an unfettered free market and had the ear of three U.S. presidents, died Thursday at age 94.”

Questions Friedman might have answered on Russia’s Plagiarism Files and use of plagiarism.

1. Was Koopmans a communist or spy?

2. Was there plagiarism involving Andrew D. Roy a victim in 1952 at U Chicago. Was Roy work being given to Markowitz?

3. Was Milton Friedman the one who told Alfred Cowles this was happening?

4. Is that why Cowles had the Managing Editor of Econmetrica resign and move the editorial office to Northwestern?

5. Was pressure used by the Soviets on plagiarism to get nominations for Kantorovich and Koopmans for the 1975 Nobel Prize 1 year ahead of Friedman.

6. Why did Friedman have a feud with Koopmans that he was still writing about in his 1998 autobio.

7. This was written about in a recent book by Martin J. Beckman who was at Cowles Commission around 1952. Beckman takes the side of Koopmans, who is dead. Why are Friedman and Beckmann still fighting this in 1998 and the 2000′s? Is it because Russia used this to pressure low interest rate loans in the 1990′s from Stanley Fischer at IMF and Larry Summers at Treasury, a nephew of Arrow and Samuelson?

8. Stanley Fischer was hired at UChicago in 1969 from MIT. Did they think he had plagiarized Nils Hakansson?

9. Did Richard Posner as a U Chicago prof know of this in the 1970′s?

10. Was Eric Posner given tenure at U Chicago in 1998 as an attempt to influence Judge Posner not to tell this to the FBI or USAO Mass? (speculation of course)

11. Did Russia use pressure to get IMF loans in the 1990′s based on this?

12. Was this info passed to the US Supreme Court during Bush v. Gore to influence the vote against Gore? (this would be hearsay from Friedman)

13. Did they know in the 1950′s that Russia had used plagiarism to help get Klaus Fuchs into Los Alamos and to pressure Niels Bohr to try to influence Churchill and Roosevelt to give the bomb secret to the Soviets?

14. Did Paul A. Samuelson on the Council of the Econometric Society in 1952 know the true story about the Managing Editor of Economerica resigning, along with the editorial Secretary, and the editorial office being moved?

15. Harry Markowitz didn’t receive his Ph.D. until Sep 1955 Quarter, the first date after the Cowles Commission left University of Chicago in July 1955. Was this because Alfred Cowles wouldn’t let Markowitz get his Ph.D.? Or was it someone at Cowles like Koopmans?
Above is speculation not assertions.

16. Markowitz admitted that he didn’t do the formulas of “algebraic simplicity” and “wide acclaim” taught to MBA students and in textbooks in 1987, 3 years before he got the Nobel Prize with the press release using exactly those words. Why did the Press Release use these words? Why are MBA students taught that Markowitz did those formulas and not Roy when Markowitz himself admits Roy did them and that he Markowitz did not?

17. Markowitz thanks Kenneth Arrow in 1955 for giving him the idea of what his thesis at UChicago was, an algorithm for mean variance optimization with short sale constraints. Wolfe did this too at about the same time. These were published in the Naval Research Logistics Quarterly c. 1956. Jacob Wolfowitz, also published in that journal.

18. The Markowitz article was published in March 1952 in Journal of Finance, a second rate journal edited at U Chicago business school. This Markowitz article contained no important formulas as results, just a graph to illustrate mean variance choice with short sale constraints. There is no formula even today for that, just an algorithm. The Roy article was published in July 1952 in Econometrica, the top journal in econ, in July 1952. Econometrica was also edited at U Chicago, in effect by the Cowles Commission. The Roy article did mean variance choice without short sale constrainst and got the formula solutions taught to MBA’s and in textbooks today that are credited to Markowitz. Jacob Wolfowitz wrote the article after Roy’s in the July 1952 issue. Did Wolfowitz know why the managing editor resigned?

19. Did Jacob Wolfowitz tell this to Paul Wolfowitz before Jacob died in 1981?

20. There are many ties from Jacob Wolfowitz to MIT econ in 1969, the year that Robert C. Merton, Paul A. Samuelson, and Stanley Fischer duplicated in part the 1966 UCLA thesis of Hakansson. These include Robert Engle, Robert Solow, and others. Search on Jacob Wolfowitz in the Nobel Prize site.

21. Did Valery Makarov put pressure on US profs at the 1972 Warsaw economics conference? Attendees included Martin Weitzman, then at MIT, now at Harvard, William A. Brock, Martin J. Beckmann and othes.

These are questions, speculation, hypotheses or opinion. All other disclaimers apply.

read more | digg story

Lawmakers Concerned About U.S.-India Nuclear Trade Deal

“U.S. law forbids selling nuclear technology to countries like India that have refused to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty & the pending nuclear deal with India would reverse years of policies aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. Congressional leaders still have not seen the promised intelligence report as the Senate prepares to vote.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/14/AR2006111401208.html

Comments

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn//comments/display?contentID=AR2006111401208&start=1&sub=AR

Many good comments above. India has substantial information on the Clinton and Bush administration. Russia got billions in IMF loans from professors in the 1990′s.

Russia had detailed info on the profs or their home universities, Harvard and MIT. Harvard was investigated starting in 1997 in connection with a HIID grant.

The info Russia had, India and Pakistan had as well as the Bush profs. In 1998, India and Pakistan got their nuclear tests, Russia another 4.8 billion dollars and the neocons got the Iraq Liberation Act. This was all during the Clinton impeachment, loans to Russia, LTCM bailout, and Iraq Liberation Act hearings. During Bush v. Gore, this history was known to both sides.

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia knew it on 9-11. Ahmed, head of Pakistan’s ISI had a meeting with Armitage, who signed the 1998 PNAC letter. Ahmed may have raised this issue.

These methods go back to the 1920′s. Russia has talked about plagiarism by Western profs in print since 1937 and used this to pressure profs connected to Los Alamos during WWII. This was already known by both India and Pakistan in the 1950′s. After Klaus Fuchs’ arrest it was obvious. These methods were used to pressure Niels Bohr during WWII and Churchill was told and he threatened Bohr with jail.

See Russia Plagiarism files and other topics related to this.

The above is speculation, opinion and hypotheses. All other disclaimers apply.

read more | digg story

The Washington Post: A Wikipedia Of Secrets

By Frank Ahrens
Sunday, November 5, 2006; Page F07

“Imagine if, in August 2001, the U.S. intelligence agencies had dumped all of their information into one secure, online resource where it was searchable and accessible to anyone who had the proper clearance.”

“Who knows if the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 could have been averted?”

Academia has allowed Russia to build files on plagiarism by profs in academia. This started in 1925 when Dirac plagiarized Max Born and Pascual Jordan with the aid of Fowler, Rutherford’s son in law. Bohr along with other institute directors in Europe were made Fellows of the Royal Society the next year by Rutherford. This helped them get Rockefeller grants that they needed in their poverty after WWI.

Fowler, Bohr and Rutherford families would stay as house guests of each other. Heisenberg was a house guest of Fowler in July 1925. The plagiarism happened in late October 1925 after the preprints of the Born Jordan paper were available. Fowler rushed the Dirac plagiarism into print in early November 1925 before the Born Jordan paper was published. He did it in the Proceedings of the Royal Society.

Lindemann the scientific adviser to Churchill in the 1930′s and during WWII was a Fellow of the Royal Society at the time and likely heard what happened. It was blatant plagiarism. Born and Jordan changed Heisenberg’s matrix notation and Dirac copied the BJ notation extensively, which showed he had seen their paper.

Dirac kept plagiarizing away. Fermi wrote him a letter about it, this is what is called Fermi Dirac statistics. Dirac later said that spin 1/2 particles should be named fermions.

Klaus Fuchs, Huanwu Peng, Kun Huang, Oppenheimer, and Heisenberg were all Max Born assistants. Peng and Huang went back to China after Fuchs was arrested in 1950. Peng is credited with being a hero of the Chinese bomb project by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.

Kapitza was Rutherford’s assistant in 1925. When Niels Bohr was rescued during WWII, there was a Kapitza letter waiting for him at the Soviet embassy in London in 1944. He met with Churchill who was likely told this history and Churchill was mad. In 1945, Terletsky was sent from Russia to meet with Bohr with another Kapitza letter.

The Russians were pushing the Kapitza story in the 1990′s while they got low interest rate loans from IMF. Sudoplatov had a footnote in his 1994 book to remind the profs in the US of this. They got angry but didn’t tell the truth about this, including Bethe and Teller.

So if a Wikipedia on Russia’s plagiarism files had been available in the 1940′s, Klaus Fuchs might not have been allowed into Los Alamos without more questions being asked. This would have showed that the profs in Los Alamos knew he was a risk.

Bethe was the boss of Fuchs in Los Alamos but also was at Bristol with him in 1936. Fuchs was a Lutheran refugee from Hitler, which meant communist. But Oppenheimer and Fuchs had both been Max Born assistants and knew the above embarrassing details, so Bethe just went along.

–

The Oppenheimer Security Clearance Hearings were in April 1954. Before Teller testified he and Bethe argued for an hour over what his testimony would be. Teller may have threatened to tell the above. This may be why he was ostracized for his testimony, they were afraid he would tell the above.

Bethe had not told this to the FBI after Fuchs was arrested. Bethe was a known plagiarist and that was already in Physical Review in coy footnotes, including the article on Bethe’s calculation of the Lamb Shift.

Nambu says he was before Bethe Salpeter for the BS equation. But Kita in a footnote tells us he was before Nambu. Kita and Nambu were Japanese and so were easy prey. Nambu is still alive and is a prof at University of Chicago.

Detailed page references on the 1925 plagiarism by Dirac of Born and Jordan, Kapitza’s obituary on Rutherford in 1937 that mentions crediting the work of others, etc. is available in

Russia Used Plagiarism Files to Gain atomic know-how.
Also see Rob Sanchez Vdare H1B DoD for Corson Fock and Chinese assisants of Max Born.

–
Two Russian profs who may work on these files today are Albert Shiryaev at Moscow State University and Valery Makarov at New Economic School Moscow. Shiryaev does it in finance and Makarov in economics. This includes misconduct at the Federal Reserve, US Treasury, Council of Economic Advisers, US DOJ Antitrust Division Economic Analysis Group, FTC, SEC, IMF and World Bank. This includes profs who may have high level positions there and whose home base university is involved in this, or journals or publishers who they are linked to who are involved.

TOC: US v. Harvard, Bush v. Gore, Russia’s files on Plagiarism

–

Aldrich Ames and Robert P. Hanssen tipped off the Russians that they had a mole problem inside Russian intelligence. This is why they had Chubais handle negotiations for IMF loans with Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers.

Boris Berezovsky had a Ph.D. in math from Moscow State University and was a manager at the Institute of Control Sciences, Academy of Sciences, USSR. This is the area that analyzed the 1969 NSF grant papers of Robert C. Merton, Paul A. Samuelson, the Stanley Fischer MIT Ph.D. thesis, and the David Levhari TN Srinivasan paper.

They analyzed this for overlapping with the 1966 Nils Hakansson UCLA Ph.D. thesis received at MIT in 1966 because Karl Shell of MIT was session chairman for Hakansson to present the paper at the Dec 1966 Winter Meeting of the Econometric Society. We are neutral on whether this was plagiarism.

Hakansson bio

Hakansson’s contribution was a critical step in both finance and the microfoundations of macroeconomics. It was the joint consumption, savings, portfolio decision under uncertainty for multiple time periods using dynamic programming for the first time. It built on, and cited, the Phelps paper, which it found an error in.

search Merton Samuelson 1969 site:harvard.edu 14 hits

search Merton Samuelson Hakansson 1969 site:harvard.edu 0 hits.

So Harvard is not crediting Hakansson even today in this form. (Merton has cited the 1970 Hakansson paper, including in his book Continuous Time Finance.) One can take off the site:harvard.edu and see that Hakansson is credited by some.

Merton Nobel Prize autobio written after fall 1997, and after USAO Mass investigation started in spring 1997 says:

” The research with Paul on warrant pricing introduced me to the expected utility maxim and its application to optimal portfolio selection in a static framework. As a consequence of that effort, I began to think about combining the static theory of portfolio selection with the intertemporal optimization of lifetime consumption under certainty found in the growth-model literature. Ignorant of the important work underway by Nils Hakansson and Hayne Leland, then graduate students elsewhere, I attacked the problem of dynamic portfolio theory in a continuous-time framework without having the benefit of their discrete-time formulations. Despite all the mathematics courses that I had taken, l had seen neither stochastic dynamic programming nor the Ito calculus, both of which turned out to be key mathematical tools needed for this research. Instead, driven by “need,” I found them and learned them on my own. Presented first at a Harvard-MIT graduate student seminar in November 1968, my paper on lifetime consumption and portfolio selection under uncertainty was published the following August as a companion paper to one by Paul investigating the effect of age on portfolio risk tolerance.”

In fact, Hakansson got his Ph.D. thesis in 1966. Merton’s August 1970 MIT Ph.D. thesis available on line from MIT cites Hakansson as forthcoming.

Merton’s Ph.D. thesis is at MIT in a set of Nobel Prize winner theses on-line. Merton’s thesis home page at MIT. (This is 13.5 megabytes, and can be downloaded as a pdf and viewed. This is better than trying to view the pdf online.)

In a 1973 J. SIAM article, Samuelson and Merton cite the Hakansson 1966 Ph.D. thesis. In the Stanley Fischer 1969 Ph.D. thesis, Fischer cites Hakansson 1966 but says he was given a copy late and had already done his work.

Stanley Fischer thesis available from MIT here. (This is over 27 megabytes, and can be downloaded as a pdf and viewed. This is better than trying to view the pdf online.) The thesis is stamped by the MIT Library with the date October 7, 1969. It is signed August 18, 1969. It itself calls itself an August 1969 thesis. It appears the final typed version was not however completed until October 1969. Fischer went on the academic job market late it appears and was hired at University of Chicago in fall 1969 not as an assistant prof but as a post doc in effect. This required a visa.

Was the footnote acknowledge Hakansson added after August 1969? Aug 1969 is when the Merton and Samuelson NSF papers were published by Harvard in the Review of Economics and Statistics. Hakansson presented his paper at Harvard Business School in Jan/Feb 1969 as did Stiglitz. Both were at Yale.
Merton claims that even in 1997 he didn’t know Hakansson got his Ph.D. in 1966 and that Hakansson was still a graduate student elsewhere in 1968.

Fischer’s thesis also contains another chapter extending the results to uncertain date of death. It turns out Hakansson has already done that and submitted a paper from Yale on it.

There were close links between Yale econ and MIT Econ at the time, including Duncan Foley and Joseph Stiglitz. Stiglitz has carried on a feud with Summers and Fischer from the mid 1990′s to date.This has gotten quite personal. Other Harvard econ profs like Rogoff reacted angrily to Stiglitz criticizing IMF policy under Fischer and Summers.

Hakansson has not been made a Fellow of the Econometric Society. See list of fellows. Almost everyone else even remotely close to this was made a Fellow. This is despite most of them not making a permanent contribution to economics the way Hakansson has. Hakansson’s formulas are part of the permanent math of economics.

Stanley Fischer doesn’t really have any such contribution for his entire career. Fischer was made a Fellow in 1977. Most Fellows don’t have a great formula that is a permanent part of economics like Hakansson does.

Even Paul Samuelson arguably doesn’t have a great single formula of the level that Hakansson has. Most Nobel Prize winners don’t have a major mathematical formula reflecting a breakthrough like Hakansson has. Hakansson’s paper and formulas and theorems were some of the great ones of the 20th century.

Almost none of the other participants at MIT, thesis supervisors and commitee members, Ph.D. students at the time, etc. had a formula as important as Hakansson’s or as influential. Yet almost all of them were made Felllows of the Econometric Society.

For a brief period in the early 1970′s, MIT and Harvard pulled back a little.

But then there was the 1972 Warsaw meeting with the Russians with Valery Makarov. From MIT was Martin Weitzman now at Harvard. William Brock from University of Chicago was there, see his CV in pdf. Also there was Martin J. Beckmann. So was Koopmans, now deceased. Attending that conference doesn’t mean they had any knowledge then or now of any attempt by Soviets like Valery Makarov to apply hypothetical pressure to Koopmans or the other Americans.

Did the Russians put on pressure on them to nominate Kantorovich? Vainshtein of the USSR had recently said Leontief of Harvard had plagiarized, in effect, Soviets on input and output. Leontief got the Nobel Prize for this. Kantorovich got the Nobel Prize in 1975 for math econ work. The only prior math econ winners were Arrow and Samuelson.

After this, the tendency to cite Hakansson went down. Hakansson was not made a Fellow of the Econometric Society in the mid 1970′s as he should have been based on comparisons to others. Why? What changed from the early 1970′s when MIT did start to acknowledge Hakansson and the late 1970′s when that became rarer in the economics profession? Was it Russia using this to pressure nominations for the Nobel Prize from math econ winners Arrow and Samuelson, uncles of Larry Summers, that made the change?

Russia got billions in low interest rate IMF loans from Fischer and Summers. Some of the money went missing. Berezovsky got rich from loans for shares in fall of 1995 after the first 10 billion tranche from IMF in spring 1995.

LTCM, other hedge funds, Goldman Sachs and university endowments traded Russian government bonds in the 1990′s. Goldman Sachs paid Bush senior 100,000 dollars to speak in Moscow June 1998. Jack Abramoff took Delay on a trip to Moscow. The oligarchs were paying off Delay in 1998 to keep the IMF funds coming that they were using academic kompromat to pressure out of Fischer and Summers.

–Fischer Interviews

Fed

Olivier Blanchard, coauthor on textbook from 1989 that cites Merton and Samuelson 1969 but not Hakansson at all, or Fischer.–

John Yoo, Paul Wolfowitz, and possibly George Bush from Prince Bandar were figuring this out in the 1990′s. They got the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998 during the Clinton impeachment hearings, along with hearings on loans to Russia, the Fed bailout of LTCM, and during the USAO Mass investigation of Harvard and Shleifer from 1997 to 2005.

Yoo may have told this to Silberman and Hatch who told Scalia. They may have used it to pressure Gore to go away after the decision in Bush v. Gore. Scalia wrote the lone opinion on why they stopped the vote counting early. That may be because he was the one who heard this.

It is possible that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia knew it at the IMF and used that to pressure Bush after 9-11 to ignore their involvement in 9-11. General Ahmed may have said this to Armitage in their meeting and that is why Armitage got so mad. Saudi Arabia got to airlift out its people from the US after 9-11. In November 2001, Pakistan got to airlift out its generals and ISI and soldiers from Kunduz Afghanistan according to Seymour Hersh. This may have been their use of this leverage.

M. A. B. Beg was a physics prof at Rockefeller University. He knew Pais who wrote about the Fock Corson episode in his 1997 book A Tale of Two Continents. Beg was dead by then. Beg was from Pakistan. Beg was an expert in Fock space and may have passed this on to Pakistan. Its possible the Saudis have profs of Muslim or Arab origins who give them info on this for money in the West.

–Reply to a comment at WaPo

quote There is no archive of entries so that a reader can view the history of entries and form an opinion. end quote. Click on history on wiki.

For example, Manmohan Singh, PM of India. Parts of his bio were taken off relating to his experience going to the Soviet Union in 1980′s, etc. Singh gave a speech at Moscow State University indicating knowledge of some of the above and of the cases in econ.

Singh helps balance Pakistan’s knowledge of this at IMF and World Bank. Pakistan had a VP at World Bank and Shaukat Aziz at Citicorp and they know of the kompromat issues used over the decades at IMF and World Bank because of profs there. This is speculation, as are the other posts.

==Excerpt removed from wiki from Singh’s bio from his cv.

A version of wiki that has this is from August 2006. Someone took out the parts indicating his possible cooperation or observation of the Soviets and his work at IMF and World Bank for India where he likely had access to files on academic misconduct of US profs and Russia’s files on them. His speech at Moscow State University on Dec 5, 2005 indicates his knowledge. Notice he mentions Kapitza. This gave him leverage over Bush and Senator Hatch and others to get the India nuclear deal moving forward.

“It is not surprising that your university should have produced great Nobel laureates like Nikolai Semionov, Igor Tamm, Ilia Frank, Leo Landau and Pyotr Kapitza.”

Tamm Dancoff was one of the things the Russians complained off in their own publications in 1955 as overreaching by Oppenheimer protege Dancoff.

“As a student of economics I have admired the work of such great Russian economists as the Nobel Laureates, Wassily Leontief and Leonid Kantorovich.”

Leontief was accused of plagiarism by Vainshtein of USSR in 1969-70 issue of Matekon. Kantorovich got Nobel Prize nominations from prior winners possibly including math econ winners Arrow and Samuelson, the uncles of Larry Summers. Samuelson was on Fischer’s Ph.D. at MIT and on Merton’s. Samuelson got an NSF grant for one of the 1969 papers and supervised Merton to get another NSF grant for another 1969 paper involved in the MIT incident. Its these two papers that Stanley Fischer credits in his 1989 textbook and not Hakansson at all.

India knew of the plagiarism by Dirac with Fowler’s help of Max Born from the 1930′s from Bhabha. Bhabha was in the UK from 1927 to 1939, much of it at Cambridge where the Dirac Fowler plagiarism happened. Bhabha was head of India’s nuclear program.

The excerpt of Singh’s bio removed from wiki:

OTHER ASSIGNMENTS
	Leader of the Indian delegation to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, Cyprus (1993)
	Leader of the Indian delegation to the Human Rights World Conference, Vienna (1993)
	Governor of India on the Board of Governors of the IMF and the International Bank of Reconstruction & Development (1991-95)
	Appointed by Prime Minister of India as Member, Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (1983-84)
	Chairman, India Committee of the Indo-japan ;Joint Study Committee (1980-83)
	- Leader, Indian Delegation to :
	Indo-Soviet Monitoring Group Meeting (1982)
	Indo-Soviet Joint Planning Group Meeting (1980-82)
	Aid India Consortium Meetings (1977-79)
	- Member Indian Delegation to :
	South-South Consultation, New Delhi (1982)
	Cancun Summit on North-South Issues (1981)
	Aid-India Consortium Meetings, Paris (1973-79)
	Annual Meetings of IMF, IBRD & Commonwealth Finance Ministers (1972-79)
	Third Session of UNCTAD, Santiago (April-May 1972)
	Meetings of UNCTAD Trade & Development Board, Geneva (May 1971 – July 1972)
	Ministerial Meeting of Group of 77, Lima (Oct.1971)
	- Deputy for India on IMF Committee of Twenty on International Monetary Reform (1972 – 74)
	- Associate, Meetings of IMF Interim Committee and Joint Fund-Bank Development Committee (1976-80, 1982-85)
	- Alternate Governor for India, Board of Governors of IBRD (1976-80)
	- Alternate Governor for India, Board of Governors of the IMF (1982-85)
	- Alternate Governor for India, Board of Governors, Asian Development Bank, Manila (1976-80)
	- Director, Reserve Bank of India (1976-80)
	- Director, Industrial Development Bank of India (1976-80)
	- Participated in Commonwealth Prime Ministers Meeting, Kingston (1975)
	- Represented Secretary;-General UNCTAD at several inter-governmental meetings including :
	Second Session of UNCTAD, 1968
	Committee on Invisibles & Financing Related to Trade, Consultant to UNCTAD, ESCAP and Commonwealth Secretariat
	- Member, International Organizations :
	Appointed as Member by the Secretary-General, United Nations of a Group of Eminent Persons to advise him on Financing for Development (December, 2000)

===

This post represents opinion, hypothesis, or speculation. Nothing in this should be considered an aspersion on any person. All statements should be interpreted as restated to give effect to this. All statements in the positive should be restated as questions. All other conceivable disclaimers apply.

read more | digg story

Larry Summers joins DE Shaw as MD

Washington Post reports that Larry Summers is joining hedge fund DE Shaw as a managing director.

Speculation on whether Russia used academic kompromat to pressure low interest rate loans in the 1990′s from Fischer and Summers was posted at Washington Post.

The following is speculation. Larry Summers and Stanley Fischer arranged billions in low interest rate loans for Russia in the 1990′s. Boris Berezovsky was the main oligarch for Russia. He had a Ph. D. in math from Moscow State University and was a manager at the Institute of Control Sciences.

There were incidents at UChicago in 1952 and MIT in 1969. The latter involving Fischer and Samuelson the uncle of Summers. There was a conference in Warsaw in 1972, where Makarov of USSR may have put pressure on US profs, some still alive, for Arrow and Samuelson, uncles of Summers to nominate Kantorovich for the Nobel Prize in economics in 1975. This was part of a larger history by Russia to use such methods starting in 1925.

Russia may have used this again in the 1990′s to pressure loans from Summers and Fischer from IMF and then use those for loans for shares. LTCM may have realized this and traded Russian government bonds. The USAO Mass investigated Harvard starting in 1997. All of the above may have been concealed from it.

Jacob Wolfowitz, Paul’s father knew of incidents up to 1981. Paul may have used this to get the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998 during the USAO Mass investigation, and hearings on LTCM bailout and loans to Russia.

Yoo or others may have passed this to Silberman to Scalia during Bush v. Gore and used it against Gore. Above is speculation.

See following for more information.

Russia Used Plagiarism Files to Gain atomic know-how.

The above has a detailed analysis of texts in physics in quantum mechanics on whether Dirac and Fowler plagiarized Max Born and Pascual Jordan and then whether Kapitza knew it and Russia used that to help pressure Niels Bohr in 1944 to advocate to turn over atomic know how to Russia. In a meeting with Churchill after Bohr got a letter from Kapitza at the Soviet embassy in London, Churchill got very angry. Lindemann, Churchill’s scientific adviser likely told him the details. Kapitza had published an obit of Rutherford in 1937 coyly implying that there had been plagiarism at Cavendish Lab. Fowler was Rutherford’s son in law and was involved.

Russia’s Plagiarism Files: Summaries and links

The Washington Post: A Wikipedia Of Secrets

This starts with the 1925 incident and reviews quickly the possible use for atomic know how spying by Russia and also China. It covers in detail, including internet searches the 1969 MIT incidents where Summers’ uncle, Paul Samuelson duplicated in part the work of a 1966 UCLA thesis received at MIT in 1966 by Prof Karl Shell who chaired a session at which it was presented by its author Nils Hakansson. Hakansson also presented his paper at Harvard in early 1969. Hakansson was on faculty with Yale from 1967 with Stiglitz who edited the first two volume of Samuelson’s papers.

A paper extending this to uncertain lives was submitted by Hakansson from Yale to a journal and published in 1969. A similar chapter appeared in Stanley Fischer’s thesis in 1969 without citation. Fischer later cited the Hakansson paper in a 1972 publication. This article then continues to discuss briefly India and Pakistan’s potential knowledge of this entire history starting with Bhabha at Cambridge England in 1927.

The PM of India gave a speech at Moscow State University in 2005 name dropping many of those involved in the physics and econ cases, including Kapitza and Kantorovich.

More on loans to Russia, US v. Harvard, etc.

David Warsh at EconomicPrincipals.com has extensive materials on the Harvard case but not these other issues of plagiarism, etc.

A recent summary is

The Light Gray Curse“

–

Note that Warsh suggests the possibility of kompromat but doesn’t discuss what it might be. Warsh also doesn’t depart from, although he doesn’t uphold either, the standard story of the 1990′s that professors from Harvard, MIT, and University of Chicago took over and ran Russia and that Russian intelligence accepted that meekly. I.e. at the same time as they were running Aldrich Ames (tried 1994) and Robert P. Hanssen (arrested 2001) and finding moles in Russian intelligence, they also accepted with meekness that these profs would control and run Russia is the standard history.

The standard history, i.e. from Harvard and the government, is that Russian intelligence, which used profs like Klaus Fuchs and Bruno Pontecorvo to get the secret of the atom bomb, had no files on academia in the US, including unouted communists or spies, and simply accepted meekly that Harvard profs would run Russia. Warsh doesn’t say he acceps such a fairy tail, but he doesn’t go beyond suggesting the possibility of kompromat either.

Note that in 1994, Sudoplatov published a book accusing J. Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi and Szilard of being quasi agents by going along with Russian intelligence activities. The US profs in physics reacted with fury and were on PBS’s The News Hour to denounce this book. Sudoplatov was retired in Moscow. He had been a top Soviet spy in WWII. He was responsible for the execution of Leon Trotsky in Mexico.

Yet according to Harvard econ dept, etc. Russian intelligence meekly accepted Harvard econ profs like Shleifer, Summers and Fischer taking over and running Russia. According to Harvard econ dept, Russian intelligence despite its great successes simply accepted that Harvard econ dept would run Russia from the HIID grant and from IMF (Stanley Fischer) and US Treasury (Larry Summers). Harvard econ in effect said to the USAO Mass that Russian intelligence never made any attempt to use any files it might have to influence Summers, Fischer and Shleifer but just let them take over Russia without doing anything to stop it. According to Harvard econ, Russian intelligence meekly accepted that Shleifer, Summers and Fischer would run Russia while at the same time it was running as spies Aldrich Ames, a high level agent in US CIA’s counter-intelligence and Robert P. Hanssen a high level US operative in counter-intelligence, both against Russia.

2 Former Treasury Chiefs Add Clout to Hedge Funds”
By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 21, 2006; Page D01

Comment page link is here.
All other disclaimers apply.