Archive for the 'Stanford' Category

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.

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.

 

Obama NATO speech Ukraine Stanford MIT Harvard undermine on Russia

March 26, 2014

Obama is giving a speech to NATO March 26, 2014 on US and NATO policy towards Russia on Crimea and Ukraine.  Obama has made it US policy to isolate Russia and apply sanctions to Russia.  Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Moody’s and the major investment banks have chosen to undermine the policy of President Obama and of the United States.  Obama’s policies are supported by both parties in Congress. Thus Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Moody’s, the banks have chosen to undermine the broad policy of the US government to isolate Russia and apply sanctions to get Russia to stop on its current course as Obama says.

Obama is invoking his grandfather who fought in Patton’s army in World War II.  But Stanford, MIT, Harvard, etc. are undermining this policy, in effect opposing a policy that Obama equates with Patton’s army.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-and-remarks

NATO has deployed forces to the East including to the Baltic Republics which are NATO members.  Stanford, Harvard, MIT, Moody’s and the banks are thus undermining the US policy to avoid Russia invading the Baltic Republics and thus triggering a crisis with NATO.

Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day organized by John Shoven of Stanford and James Poterba of MIT to honor Stanley Fischer the day after he concealed information from the Senate Banking Committee and the Securities Exchange commission was done to undermine the US credibility with Putin.  Stanford, MIT, Harvard, etc. know that Russia has used plagiarism kompromat for decades to get its way.  They know Putin believes these are silver bullets that let him do what he want and have leverage over Obama from the Stanley Fischer and earlier Larry Summers’ appointments.

Stanford knows that Russia has posted kompromat on Darrell Duffie who is head of Moody’s.  They know Russia Today has gloated over Moody’s putting the US on credit watch in 2012 when Duffie was head of the MIS Committee of Moody’s with oversight over the credit rating of the United States government.

Darrell Duffie is head of the MIS Committee of Moody’s which oversees ratings of financial securities including the bonds of Russia.

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.

Holdings: 23,307 shares

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

This document gives Russia leverage over Duffie by virtue of misconduct during the course of his work at Stanford, supervising a Ph.D. thesis of a Chinese student.  This was posted in 2005.  Duffie joined Moody’s MIS Committee in 2008 supposedly to be a trusted outside person who was independent.

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

 

 

Sergei Guriev New Economic School Moscow Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day

March 26, 2014

Stanley Fischer testified to the Senate Banking Committee on March 13, 2014. He did not disclose that he plagiarized his Ph.D. at MIT in 1969, that he has prevented Nils Hakansson his victim from getting recognition, and that Russia knew that during the 1990s when he was in control of IMF loans to Russia at the IMF.

The following day, March 14, 2014, Stanford SIEPR paid Fischer 100,000 dollars as an award but in effect for concealing information from the public and the Securities Exchange Commission.  Stanford is potentially liable for lawsuits arising from credit misratings at Moody’s on Russian government bonds and on securities issued or traded by its partner financial institutions including Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.  This could amount to billions or even trillions of dollars of liability to Stanford, MIT and these institutions.

Sergei Guriev was one of the speakers at Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day.  Guriev’s background indicates he likely was involved in analyzing the plagiarism by Stanley Fischer in the 1990s as well as in that by Stanford Professor J. Darrell Duffie now chairman of the MIS Committee of Moody’s that oversees the ratings of all financial securities in the world.  This exceeds 50 trillion dollars.

Moody’s threatened to downgrade the credit rating of the United States in September 2012 while Russia had this leverage on Duffie, Stanford and Moody’s.  Russia Today gleefully reports this.

http://rt.com/usa/us-rating-debt-deficit-898/

Russia had this leverage over the US government credit rating and that of other US financial institutions.  Sergei Guriev at the time was Rector of the New Economic School in Moscow that helps the Russian government do kompromat plagiarism analysis on Duffie, Stanford, Stanley Fischer, MIT, etc.

Sergei Guriev of the New Economic School Moscow and of Paris Science Po.

http://pages.nes.ru/sguriev/

http://pages.nes.ru/sguriev/bio.htm

http://pages.nes.ru/sguriev/CV.htm

1993 – 1994 Russian Academy of Science, Postgraduate Studies Degree: Ph.D. (Candidate of Science) in Physics and Math Thesis: “Some Mathematical Models of Saving and Investment”

Russia used kompromat on Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers via his uncle Paul Samuelson to get IMF loans in the 1990s. This thesis topic is on that same subject.

Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT)
Department of Management and Applied Mathematics
(6 year program)

MIPT was founded by Peter Kapitsa who invented the method of academic plagiarism kompromat for Russia in the 1920s. This was used to help get atomic secrets. The Max Born Spy Ring and in effect the Kapitsa Spy Ring was part of this effort. Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Cornell, Princeton, Chicago concealed info from the FBI about the Fock Letter about Corson during the FBI investigation of Edward M. Corson following the confession of Klaus Fuchs, a close friend of Corson. Corson, Fuchs, and Peierls worked for a time on separation methods for uranium during WWII in the U.S. Peierls was also investigated and the universities kept the Fock Letter and plagiarism kompromat secret from the FBI and MI5 during this investigation.

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

Sergei Guriev, Visiting Professor, Sciences Po in Paris; Professor of Economics, New Economic School in Moscow.  ” Lunch Remarks: The State of the Russian Economy

http://siepr.stanford.edu/Sergei.Guriev

” In 1997-98, Dr. Guriev visited the Department of Economics at M.I.T. for a one-year post-doctoral placement”

This is when Russia was using plagiarism kompromat on Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers, nephew of Paul Samuelson and Kenneth Arrow to get IMF loans.  Guriev’s thesis was on the same topic as the plagiarism by Stanley Fischer and Paul Samuelson.

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

He was a Morgan Stanley Professor of Economics and a Rector at the New Economic School (NES) in Moscow until he resigned on 30 April 2013 and fled to France.[1] He joined NES in 1998 focusing on research and teaching and became a full-time permanent faculty member in 1999. He became the school’s Rector in 2004.

Note at Stanford, at NES Moscow Guriev is still considered employed at NES Moscow.

Guriev interview June 2013 Der Spiegel

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/russian-economist-sergei-guriev-putin-fears-all-opposition-a-905306.html

==

In a SPIEGEL interview, prominent Russian economist and former government adviser Sergei Guriev discusses the Kremlin’s retaliation campaign against the opposition and why he recently fled to France.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Guriev, why did you flee to France?

 

ANZEIGE

Guriev: I was under pressure for months. My wife had already predicted this development three years ago, despite the political thaw under then-President and current Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. She didn’t want our children to grow up in a country without freedom, so she decided to move to Paris. I, on the other hand, was still hopeful.

SPIEGEL: At the time, you were part of a small group of people who shaped Medvedev’s economic policy. When did you decide to flee?

Guriev: The turning point came in late April, when investigators turned up at my office with a search warrant and seized all of my email correspondence since 2008 — 45 gigabytes.

SPIEGEL: That’s the Siberian city near the Chinese border where oil magnate Mikhail Khodorkovsky was held in a prison camp for many years. You are now accused of having been paid by Khodorkovsky to prepare an expert report that recommends his release.

Guriev: That’s ridiculous. In 2003, Moscow’s New Economic School (NES) received $50,000 (€37,500) from a partner of Khodorkovsky’s. I didn’t receive a single kopek of that money. I was a visiting professor at Princeton University at the time, and only a year later did I become the rector at NES. Besides, I prepared the expert report in 2011 for then-President Medvedev, together with colleagues.

SPIEGEL: How is the New Economic School funded?

Guriev: We are a private university. We derive our funding from tuition and donations from Russia and abroad.

SPIEGEL: Of course the Kremlin doesn’t like that. Are you disappointed that Medvedev couldn’t or wouldn’t protect you?

Guriev: I prefer not to comment on that. He’s in a difficult situation. No one seems to mention the modernization he promised anymore. (President) Vladimir Putin decides everything.

SPIEGEL: Sergey Markov, a political scientist with ties to the Kremlin, has practically accused you of treason because of your ideas on the privatization of state-owned companies, which Medvedev took up, and he has described you as the intellectual center of the opposition to Putin. Do you intend to overthrow Putin?

Guriev: Of course not. I’m an academic, not a politician.

===

http://www.nes.ru/en/about/contacts

(Note while looking at NES webpages, Firefox started to take up a huge amount of time, likely coincidence, since that problem manifests at other times as well.)

New Economic School,
Suite 1721, Nakhimovskii Prospekt 47,
117418, Moscow, Russia
(This is a short walk from the metro station Profsoyuznaya (orange line). You exit from the front of the train if you are coming from the center and then take two left turns before exiting the metro. We are located in the CEMI building)

=

http://www.nes.ru/en/about/management

RECTOR

Simeon Djankov, Professor, NES

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The governing body of the School is the Board of Directors. The Board meets bimonthly to make strategic and operational decisions. Presently, the Board of Directors includes:

 

==

Notice the President of NES is also Director of CEMI.  NES is in the CEMI building.  CEMI is a state funded entity from the Soviet Union.

http://www.mathnet.ru/php/organisation.phtml?option_lang=eng&orgid=1395

http://www.nes.ru/en/people/catalog/m/vmakarov

In 1985, the year of Perestroika, he took up his current position as the Director of the Central Economics and Mathematical Institute in Moscow.

Valery Makarov was at one of the conferences in Poland in the 1970s to put pressure on American profs using Paul Samuelson plagiarism kompromat to get nominations for the Nobel Prize in econ for Kantorovich of the USSR.  Stanley Fischer plagiarism was part of that.

Later plagiarism by Darrell Duffie at Stanford putting a paper on dynamic programming into a Stanford Ph.D. thesis was a continuation of the same subject.

Sergei Guriev was at New Economic School, when Russia posted the Duffie document that is evidence of his plagiarism.

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

This 1999 unpublished manuscript contains a citation to the paper copied in the Stanford thesis in 2000.  It shows Duffie had the paper that was copied and so is evidence of his plagiarism.

Duffie is a member of SIEPR.

http://siepr.stanford.edu/peopleprofile/2595

Victor Polterovich is another example of overlap of CEMI and NES.

http://www.nes.ru/en/people/catalog/p/vpolterovich

Head of Laboratory, Central Economics and Mathematics Institute
(CEMI), Russian Academy of Sciences;

Professor, Chairman of Academic Committee,
New Economic School (NES), Moscow.

Guriev allowed Der Spiegel to be deceived that NES was in opposition to the Russian government of Putin. In fact, NES is in the CEMI building, the same person is head of both, and the same people have done kompromat analysis on profs in the US and UK since the 1970s.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/why-putin-freed-kremlin-opponent-and-oligarch-khodorkovsky-a-940336.html

Sergei Guriev — the former rector of Moscow’s New Economic School who fled to Paris in April — was also quick to comment on the news. “Khodorkovsky was released because Russia’s image has continuously deteriorated lately,” he said. There has been widespread speculation that Guriev will also be charged in a third trial against the oligarch.

Der Spiegel seems to work with Guriev to burnish his credibility as a Kremlin dissident.  But as we saw above with NES, CEMI, this involves deception of the readers.

==

Stanford seems to have provided material assistance to Russia at the SIEPR Agenda Day for Stanley Fischer.  There is an NES graduate at the Federal Reserve Board in Washington D.C.  They are likely afraid she will spill the beans to the FBI and Senate Banking Committee and the Securities Exchange Commission about  Stanley Fischer, MIT, Stanford, Duffie, and the role that NES plays in this.

Darrell Duffie is head of the MIS Committee of Moody’s which oversees ratings of financial securities including the bonds of Russia.

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.

Holdings: 23,307 shares

Stanford has been requested to investigate this and to notify Moody’s, Securities Exchange Commission, Federal Reserve Board, Senate Banking Committee and FBI.  So far they have not replied to these requests.

Obama spoke at NES Moscow in 2009.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-new-economic-school-graduation

Stanford Professor Michael McFaul was US ambassador to Russia and spoke at NES Moscow in 2012.

http://moscow.usembassy.gov/amb-nes060712.html

The Duffie provisional manuscript was posted on the Internet in 2005 and so was posted at the time of these speeches. Stanford Professor Darrell Duffie was head of the MIS Committee at the time of the McFaul speech in 2012 and thus had control of the credit ratings of Russia and the US government.

As stated, a former NES person is at the Federal Reserve Board in Washington. That person could blow the whistle on all of them.  This is why they have to appoint Stanley Fischer Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. This is why Stanford at SIEPR Agenda Day paid Stanley Fischer 100,000 for concealing information on this from the Senate Banking Committee and the Securities Exchange Commission as well as the Federal Reserve Board and the FBI.

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

Stanley Fischer Plagiarism Proof with citations short cut and paste version

March 19, 2014

This is a short summary of the evidence of plagiarism by Stanley Fischer. This is for cut and paste in emails or text files.

Stanley Fischer likely plagiarized Nils Hakansson in Fischer’s 1969 MIT Ph.D. thesis.

Fischer’s thesis was partly a copy of Hakansson’s 1966 thesis at UCLA and partly from a working paper of Hakansson at Yale in 1967.

The Hakanssons have set up a website with their papers.

http://www.hakansson.com/

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

http://www.hakansson.com/nils/papers/optimal69.pdf

The latter one became chapter 5 of Fischer’s thesis.

Fischer not only plagiarized Hakansson but he has prevented Hakansson getting recognition in textbooks for Hakansson’s work.

At least 4 people replicated Hakansson’s work between 1966 when Hakansson’s thesis was sent by UCLA to a working paper distribution list and 1970 when Hakansson’s paper was published late by Econometrica. This includes Paul Samuelson, David Levhari, TN Srinivasan, Stanley Fischer and depending on interpretation, Robert C. Merton.

Franklin Fisher was chairman of the Stanley Fischer thesis and at the same time editor of Econometrica. I have a letter from Econometrica in June 1969 accepting the final version of Fischer’s thesis.

In August 1969, Harvard and MIT published two papers, one by Samuelson and the other by Merton which contained versions of Hakansson’s work without
citation.

Karl Shell of MIT had the Hakansson thesis in 1966 because he chaired a session at which it was presented and that information was published in a journal.

John Shoven of SIEPR got his Ph.D. at Yale in 1973 and was likely a student in 1969 when several papers copying Hakansson’s work were published. That includes
one by David Levhari and TN Srinivasan that was done at Stanford. Hakansson was a professor at Yale up to 1969.

Fischer’s role in plagiarizing Hakansson was known then in economics and there were two economics conferences in Poland in the 1970s. At those conferences, Russia likely pressured professors from MIT and the US to help get nominations from Paul Samuelson and Kenneth Arrow for Kantorovich to get the Nobel Prize in economics in 1975.

In 1997, in his Nobel Prize autobiography, Robert C. Merton falsely stated that Hakansson was a graduate student after 1966. This is important, because chapter 5 of Fischer’s MIT thesis is a copy of a working paper of Hakansson at Yale in 1967.

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1997/merton-bio.html

“. 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. ”

This is false. Hakansson graduated in 1966 and was a professor at Yale at the time.

Merton and Fischer were suitemates at MIT at the time.

Franklin Fisher and Karl Shell were also suitemates as professors at the time. Shell got the Hakansson thesis in 1966 at MIT from public records.

http://www.aeaweb.org/Annual_Meeting/assa_programs/ASSA_1966.pdf

Page 114 Growth Session chaired by Karl Shell.

http://www.karlshell.com/pdfs/md.pdf

Karl Shell
“my suitemate, coauthor, and friend, Frank
Fisher.”

Stanley Fischer handled loans to Russia for the IMF.

Long Term Capital Management was a company Robert C. Merton was part of and they heavily purchased Russian government bonds as if they expected Fischer to be forced to keep helping them.

The Russian government has been publishing comments on plagiarism since the 1930s. This is a letter from Fock to the physics journal Physical Review that was published by the journal.

http://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.72.737

Edward Corson the plagiarist of Fock was later investigated by the FBI for atomic spying.

Edward Corson site:fbi.gov

Edward Corson Fock site:fbi.gov

Your search – Edward Corson Fock site:fbi.gov – did not match any documents.

Edward Corson Oppenheimer site:fbi.gov

4 results (0.34 seconds)

Thus Oppenheimer didn’t tell the FBI about the Fock Letter or plagiarism by Corson. This is despite Corson
doing this at Princeton Institute for Advanced Study just as Oppenheimer became Institute Director in 1947.

The universities did not tell the FBI about this letter from Fock during the investigation. There are other cases of Russia using these tactics.

Some of my research on this is cited in the book Nuclear Express by Thomas C. Reed a former Secretary of the Air Force and who also worked on developing nuclear weapons with Edward Teller.

http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/Biographies/Display/tabid/225/Article/104983/thomas-c-reed.aspx

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/category/klaus-fuchs/

http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/article/61/9/10.1063/1.2982122

Stanley Fischer has never cited his own papers out of his thesis published in the early 1970s. By 2004, his coauthor Olivier Blanchard didn’t even know what Fischer’s thesis was on.

http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/63728 Interview of Stanley Fischer by Olivier Blanchard 2004/2005

http://archive.org/stream/interviewofstanl00blan/interviewofstanl00blan_djvu.txt

O: Your thesis was on macro. Why?

F: My thesis was actually on lifetime portfolio choice.

also

F: Bob (Robert C.) Merton arrived a year after me, and we shared an office for a year.

Blanchard and Fischer wrote a book and in that book they had a section on that same work but they cited Samuelson. So Fischer didn’t tell his own coauthor about his thesis.

Page 281 of their book Lectures on Macroeconomics starts some of this discussion in equations.

http://books.google.com/books?id=j_zs7htz9moC&pg=PA275&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

Fischer’s Ph.D. thesis can be downloaded from MIT.

http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/13873
Essays on assets and contingent commodities.
Author: Fischer, Stanley
Citable URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/13873
Department: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Economics
Publisher: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date Issued: 1969

The SIEPR day is managed by John Shoven.

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

In 2003, Samuelson claimed it wasn’t plagiarism in his 1969 paper.

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

“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. ”

In January 1969, in a working paper Joe Stiglitz thanks Samuelson for comments on Stiglitz’s paper and also cites the Hakansson 1966 thesis in a footnote on page 7a.

http://cowles.econ.yale.edu/P/cd/d02b/d0262.pdf

University of Chicago hired Stanley Fischer in fall 1969. They had already cited the Hakansson Working Paper 101 most likely in a paper by Fama.

China has posted a copy of this Fama paper.

Fama multiperiod consumption investment decisions site:.cn

Multiperiod Consumption-Investment Decisions. Eugene F. Fama. The American Economic Review, Volume 60, Issue 1 (1970), 163-174.

Note Fama cites the UCLA working paper 101 version of Hakansson that was mimeographed and sent to a distribution list of top universities and institutes.

Fama multiperiod consumption investment decisions site:.ru

In Iran

Fama multiperiod consumption investment decisions site:.ir

There are Iranians in academia and Wall Street and London who know this. Also University of Paris to check out.

Pakistan

Fama multi period consumption investment decisions site:.pk

[DOC]
naqvi.doc – Lahore School of Economics
http://www.lahoreschoolofeconomics.edu.pk/…/vol5-1%5CNAQVI.DOC‎
by H Naqvi – ‎Related articles
Moreover the CAPM is essentially a single period model. It is clear …… Fama, 1970, Multi-period consumption-investment decision, American Economic Review.

Fama “multi period consumption investment decisions” site:.pk

Untitled
lhrgateway.nu.edu.pk/articles/3540779256.pdf‎
Fama, E. F., Multi-period consumption-investment decisions, American. Economic Review, 1970, Vol. 60, 163–174. 45. Fang, Y., Lai, K. K. and Wang, S. Y., …

Malaysia

Fama multiperiod consumption investment decisions site:.my

Download (233Kb) – Universiti Utara Malaysia
etd.uum.edu.my/2918/2/1.Syed_Mohd_Na’im_Syed_Salim.pdf‎
2.1.3 Description of Investment Portfolio, Portfolio Optimization and Asset. Allocation . …… Fama, E. F. (1970) Multiperiod Consumption-Investment Decisions,.

India

Fama multiperiod consumption investment decisions site:.in

Fama “multi period consumption investment decisions” site:ac.in

BIBLIOGRAPHY (JOURNALS) – Shodhganga
shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/12549/…/10_bibliography.p…‎
by RW Rebello – ‎2013 – ‎Related articles
pp. 363 – 384. 28. Davis, J. L., Fama E. F. and French K. R. (2000), “Characteristics, Co- … Fama, E. F. (1970), “Multi-period Consumption-Investment Decisions”,.
[PDF]
View/Open – Goa University Library
library.unigoa.ac.in:8081/xmlui/bitstream/handle/…/120/T-449.pdf?…‎
Eugene Fama (1991)4 in his paper discusses the various hypotheses on efficient …… Fama, E. F. (1970), “Multi-period Consumption-Investment Decisions”,.

Indonesia

fama 1970 “Multiperiod Consumption-Investment Decisions” site:.id

5 results (0.24 seconds)
Search Results

[PDF]
FINANCE Return Distributions in Finance.pdf
http://www.untag-smd.ac.id/…/FINANCE%20Return%20Distributions%20in%…‎
using updated data from the study of Fama (1965), find extensive evidence that …… Fama, E. (1970) `Multiperiod Consumption-Investment Decisions’, American …
Volume 60 Thn 1970 No 01 – Periodical – Bank Sentral Republik …
http://www.bi.go.id › Home › About BI › Cyber Library‎
Bank Indonesia
Volume 60 Thn 1970 No 01. A Geometric Treatment of … Multiperiod Consumption-Investment Decisions. Eugene F. Fama. On the Economic Welfare of Victims …
Volume 60 Thn 1970 No 01 – Bank Indonesia
http://www.bi.go.id › Home › About BI › Cyber Library‎
Bank Indonesia
Volume 60 Thn 1970 No 01. A Geometric Treatment of … Multiperiod Consumption-Investment Decisions. Eugene F. Fama. On the Economic Welfare of Victims …
Periodicals Collection – Bank Sentral Republik Indonesia
http://www.bi.go.id › Home › About BI › Cyber Library‎
Bank Indonesia
Volume 60 Thn 1970 No 01. A Geometric Treatment of … Multiperiod Consumption-Investment Decisions. Eugene F. Fama. On the Economic Welfare of Victims …
Volume 60 Thn 1970 No 01 – Koleksi Artikel – Bank Sentral Republik …
http://www.bi.go.id › … › Perpustakaan_old‎Translate this page
Bank Indonesia
Perpustakaan_old. Volume 60 Thn 1970 No 01. A Geometric … Multiperiod Consumption-Investment Decisions. Eugene F. Fama. On the Economic Welfare of …

This is hypothesis or speculation. Please include the disclaimer in any copies. This disclaimer applies to all communications even those it is left out.

Hostage Taking Scenario at Harvard or MIT during Sochi

January 31, 2014

This post explores a hypothetical scenario of a hostage taking at Harvard or MIT during the Sochi Winter Olympics.  This would be done by Chechen or Muslim groups who wanted to make a spectacular statement linking Larry Summers and Stanley Fischer to the IMF funding of the Second Chechen War that Chechens and Muslims blame for the genocide of Chechens.

In addition to providing such a linkage, it would also expose the FBI as inept and corrupt in the background checks of Larry Summers in 2009 and again earlier in 2013 and for Stanley Fischer for Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

From the point of view of Chechens or Muslims taking hostages at the MIT or Harvard Economics Department, business schools or a dorm or library would create a spectacular propaganda event.  This would be better than a hostage taking of athletes in Sochi because it would tie the responsibility of Larry Summers and Stanley Fischer to the IMF to IMF loans funding the Second Chechen War and genocide of the Chechens.

Moreover, to these groups, the CIA was responsible for fomenting conflict in Chechnya that led to the war.  They also believe the CIA’s motive was at least partly to get oil and pipelines from that region.  This can create a fever of revenge in their minds as they consider that Chechens died so that CIA linked investors could become millionaires or even billionaires.  Secondary targets could be various companies or investment groups linked to this activity.

Anyone with information on these subjects should report it.  See the bottom of the following post on this subject.

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2014/01/31/navigating-resources-on-russia-plagiarism-files/

John Hennessy Stanford ethnically cleanses whites

March 3, 2009

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10117

John Hennessy on Charlie Rose declares that the best and brightest are Chinese and that they will control America technologically and that this is Stanford’s mission.  Hennessy said the mission statement of Stanford is to do what the Chinese government wants and to promote the ethno interests of Chinese.  Stanford is now an outpost of the Chinese intelligence service.  It serves its interests and is part of a pipeline of Chinese ethnocrats, and know-how and people pipelines.

Hennessy said Chinese are the best and brightest.  Hennessy implied Chinese only policy in Ph.D. programs in science, math, engineering and business is where Stanford is headed to the extent possible.  He said the purpose of business in Silicon Valley was to open branches in China and transfer technology and know-how to China and Chinese.

(Note that the superior and best and brightest  Chinese for some reason need know-how transfer from the whites they are replacing at Stanford.)

http://www.stanford.edu/about/facts/undergraduate.html
Ethnic Diversity
African American 10.5%
Asian American 19.8%
International 7.2%
Mexican American 7.9%
Native American 3.2%
Native Hawaiian 0.8%
Other Hispanic 6.7%
White 31.5%
Other 3.1%
Declined to State 9.5%

Hennessy said that Chinese are the top source of grad students at Stanford followed by India, if I remember his remarks appropriately. The implication was that the grad school was more non-white than whites. Hennessy said Stanford had the best and brightest in its grad school. He said the whole future was in China and that all new tech companies had to have a branch in China.

The Operations Research dept at Stanford

http://or.stanford.edu/ oras_peop…_Ph.D._Students

Ph.D. students are mostly non-white.

Its similar at OR at Princeton.

OR is a large part of practical math, constrained optimization. Database mining by government or industry is operations research to a large extent.

Its a field most people don’t know about. Very few Americans now are taught in it. The people controlling how to data mine databases and optimize them are these people. They control the databases. They write he code that helps decide what offers to make to which consumer segment by the programs they write, or who INS will stop on their way into the country, or how well an electronic fence will work v. increasing the border patrol.

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2009/03/media-manipulators-at-work.html

China has intentionally spread nuclear know-how to Muslim states to use against whites, Christians and Jews.  See

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/category/klaus-fuchs/

==Also this comment at Commentary Magazine

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rosner/27771

Old Atlantic Says:
March 1st, 2009 at 4:21 PM

Stillman case against CIA etc

# [PDF]
Danny B. Stillman v. Central Intelligence Agency — Memorandum Opinion
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – View as HTML
Mar 30, 2007 … Declaration of Danny B. Stillman (“Fifth Stillman Decl.”) ¶ 3. In China, Stillman visited nuclear weapons facilities and test …
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/stillman033007.pdf – Similar pages
# [PDF]
Danny B. Stillman v. Department of Defense
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – View as HTML
Plaintiff Danny Stillman is a former employee of the Los …… Aly Decl. at ¶ 14(b). These conclusions about the importance of …
news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/dod/stllmndod61002opn.pdf – Similar pages

These were in 2001 before and after 9/11.

CIA was in with Pakistan ISI in 1980’s and 1990’s. They covered up for Pakistan to get
money while China was giving it nukes. CIA was completely complicit in Pakistan’s activities and was trying to suppress that. See Complete 9/11 Timeline. The pressure on Stillman was in 2001 before and after 9/11.

Search Pakistan sanctions unjust. I have some links here:

http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2008/12/confirmation-letter-spores-grown-in.html

http://www.iht.com/articles/2001/09/07/edmansoor_ed3_.php


Pakistan:Leaving U.S. Sanctions in Place Would Be Grave
By Mansoor Ijaz, R. James Woolsey and James A. Abrahamson
Published: FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2001

NEW YORK: The Bush administration is preparing to lift punitive sanctions imposed on India for its nuclear program. But clearing this hurdle to bolster political, economic and military ties with India while maintaining even sterner sanctions on Pakistan would be seen throughout the Middle East as discrimination of the first order. Islamabad would be pushed in dangerous directions, particularly toward increased reliance on its nuclear and missile programs.

Further crippling a weak Pakistan, perhaps to the point of state failure, would invite its myriad problems to spill over into other countries. Islamic militancy, arms and drug trafficking and religiously motivated sectarian violence could have devastating consequences for India’s economic prospects and cause trouble in important Islamic oil-producing countries. Risks to U.S. forces and interests in the Middle East would be a virtual certainty.

This was week before 9/11. One hypothesis: Pakistan ISI head came to DC asked to lift sanctions and give money. US said no. So he gave go ahead to 9/11. Following week US agreed. Then he gave go ahead to anthrax letters to divert attention from terrorism from abroad to domestic terrorism.

==

Stanford spreads out know-how to China that gives it to Pakistan and Iran and other Muslim terror states and groups.  China has an easy to make nuke specifically for Muslim states.  That is what it gave to Pakistan which passed it on to Iran.  That is Stanford doing that.

Assuming Pakistan was behind 9/11 and the anthrax attacks to extort money and end sanctions for its nuclear test in 1998, that makes Stanford a co-consprirator in 9/11 as part of this overall plan to ethnically cleanse whites.

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/06/30/population-genetics-island-model-one-way-migration/

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1213928&blobtype=pdf

We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.

This is Stanford’s plan according to Stanford president John Hennessy.  It was amazing the facial expressions he had while Charlie Rose exposed that at Stanford whites were a minority as undergraduates.

Hennessy also grinned while saying every company has to open a branch in China and transfer know-how to China there.  Does that include Boeing?   Defense contractors like Lockheed Martin?  Los Alamos National Laboratory as well?  Or just the feeder companies and universities that gather the know-how for China?  Hennessy sounded like and in fact is, a propagandist for China and Chinese ethno-interests.

The above is opinion, hypothesis and speculation. Restate all statements as questions.  All other disclaimers apply.  This is part of a petitition to Congress to end immigration and investigate the influence of foreign governments and entities at US institutions including educational ones, financial firms and technology companies.

%d bloggers like this: