On Friday March 14, 2014, Stanford University hosted the 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.
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.
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
Several more related posts in January 2013 at NMDR are indexed here
And so on.
These relate to discussion of
- Possible plagiarism by Stanley Fischer of Nils Hakansson
- 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.
- Russia’s use of these.
- That Russia can use these to pressure Duffie, Stanford or Moody’s for ratings benefits.
- That other countries can piggy back on this such as Iran or China.
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. …
Iran has since posted the document if it was not already posted.
At link location pad.um.ac.ir/file/view/371774
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
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?
- Taunt the blog in some way?
- 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.
- Send a message to professors who know of the Stanley Fischer plagiarism not to tell the FBI, Senate or Federal Reserve about it?
- 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.
- 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.
- Pressure the author of the blog NMDR not to provide information to these.
- Mock the Senate Banking Committee as too stupid to figure this out.
- Mock the FBI as too stupid to figure this out.
- Mock the Department of Justice as too political or too corrupt to proceed in this case.
- Mock DOJ and FBI for not having discovered Russia’ use of plagiarism kompromat to get atomic secrets.
- Mock DOJ and FBI for not figuring Russia used this to get IMF loans in the 1990s.
- Mock DOJ and FBI for being deceived by Harvard and MIT in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.
- Mock DOJ and FBI for being deceived in numerous federal background checks from the Atomic Bomb Project in WWII to the Stanley Fischer nomination.
- Mock DOJ and FBI for not understanding that Aaron Swartz may have been trying to use JSTOR to expose some of this.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Tell Stanley Fischer that is his job.
- Tell the Fed employees that Stanley Fischer is there to keep them quiet.
- 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.
- Tell employees at financial institutions the same.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.