Agreement written with vanishing ink

And Rends does it again, making claims with a link to a document that does not show what he claims. This one was a familiar point to it, and I thought for a few minutes that I’d made some big mistake with what I’d written before. Instead, there is another explanation.

On LENR Forum, Rends wrote: (Abd emphasis)

The heat exchanger story is a good example, as the IH expert Rick A. Smith has shown in his report by means of photographs, there was this serpentine heat exchanger, just as Rossi has described it to Wong. What sense should the installation of this heat exchanger make, if the Ecat plant does not work? Because according to the agreements between IH and JM Products, no IH personal would have been allowed to take a look into the black box. This heat exchanger makes sense only if heat is actually produced, if this was all a fake, this installation would have been completely unnecessary.


Problem: first, the “serpentine” is described as a “heat exchanger,” but is not the heat exchanger claimed by Rossi to be in the upstairs room, venting heat out the window there. It is, rather, the box in the downstairs “customer area,” seemingly used for heating products. Rends is searching for possibilities to make the heat real. There was, of course, real heat, about 20 kW worth, so the Rends argument is completely bogus.

However, Rends also mentions something else that Rossi Said, the alleged prohibition of access by IH personnel to the JMP customer area, according to the “agreements.” The Agreement between JMP, Rossi, and IH, I have pointed out many times, does not contain such a clause. However,

Forty-Two wrote: (in response to Rends)

Clause 9 ot the term sheet (245-3):


9. The personnel of IH and Leonardo will not have access to the plant of JM, and the personnel of JM will not have access to the inside of the 1MW plant, or to the information about how the 1mw (sic) plant operates, which are trade secrets of Leonardo and IH.

Damn, because Rossi represented both (director of Leonardo as well as of JM), he wouldn’t have been allowed neither inside the 1MW plant, nor at the JM side!:/

Seeing that, WTF? I looked at the Term sheet so many times it is coming out of my ears, and I didn’t see that. Then I see the “1 mw.” This was a draft, not the final, signed document. This is what we have:

The Term Sheet as signed and as first uploaded to PACER.

(restricts JMC personnel access to Plant, but not IH personnel access to “the plant of JM.” So where did this come from?

245-3 is a set of emails with drafts of the term sheet. The draft quoted is PDF page 4 of that document. This draft is explicit that the customer is Johnson-Matthey, and it is called JM throughout.

Page 6 is Darden replying to Rossi, July 10, 2014 who commented, the same day, on the draft. The Johnson-Matthey issue is not mentioned by Rossi, only the typo “1 mw” for “1 MW.” Otherwise it was “perfect.”

Page 9 is the next draft. It still reads Johnson Matthey but the 1 mw blooper is fixed and … the restriction on access by IH to the customer plant is removed.

Page 13 is Rossi explaining that it would be a bad idea for Darden to visit Johnson Matthey in London because they wanted this to be secret. Rossi is confirming the idea that Johnson Matthey was the customer, but merely preferring to act through the U.S. company. He pretends to be in communication with the UK company about the proposed agreement.

This goes on. “Johnson Matthey” is replaced with “JM CORPORATION (‘JM’), the operator of a Miami production facility.

Which, of course, did not exist when this was represented, period.

Darden wanted to meet with them before finalizing the agreement. Hence the meeting set up with Johnson, ostensibly representing JM.

Through all this, Rossi is lying. Johnson then backs him up, signing the OFAC declaration as representing a “U.K. entity.” Which was, again, a lie. Johnson is claiming that creating a U.K. entity was intended, but not done because it was too expensive. Regardless, he signed a declaration as fact that was not fact, only at best an intention, and specifically an intention to create some dummy U.K. corporation so that it could be pretended that this was actually Johnson Matthey.

Is it possible that Rossi misled Johnson as well? It is not impossible, just as it is not impossible that Bass was misled. However, if one is misled into playing a role in fraudulent representation, that would be a protection against criminal prosecution, generally, but not against civil damages.

The copy shown that supports Rends’ narrative was an early draft, not the document as signed, and when Rossi claimed that the Agreement prohibited IH access to the customer plant, this was either a lie or a very defective and highly selective memory: Rossi remembers what he wants to be true. In this case, that he had the contractual right to put on his JMP hat and prohibit access.

There is no hope for Rossi under these conditions. He failed to pull out a Wabbit, though he is still pretending mightily, posturing before his JONP audience. But maybe the Zalli letter will prove that IH was just pretending to be interested in Rossi technology, actually they were planning on dissolving the reactors in fuming nitric acid to hide the disruptive technology, but the intrepid Dr. Rossi foiled that nefarious plan.

Stay tuned for the next exciting episode of As the Planet Turns, where a bevy of Quark-X reactors, launched into orbit by the North Koreans, turns night into day, ruining the nightclub vampire business that Cherokee depends on.

Author: Abd ulRahman Lomax


20 thoughts on “Agreement written with vanishing ink”

  1. Abd – a nice analysis of the tangled Term Sheet issues.

    You need maybe to give this post a title: Licence permission or permitted license? or something.

    At least LF does have this debate with the Rossi fan-club excuses seeing the daylight and being anatomically pulled apart.

    If I were IH – I’d hope not to win everything at MSJ stage and have a Trial on the Rossi fraud for maximum publicity and to prevent Rossi from claiming that he lost on a legal technicality. But, whatever happens, Rossi’s ability to manipulate hard-core fans seems to be resilient.

    1. Thanks.

      Ah. I see I forgot to give this post a title and categories. Fixed. I actually copied “Licence permission or permitted license?” intending to paste it in, it is catchy. Or slightly catchy. The catchiness wore out while my clipboard was carrying the burden to the title field. It seems related to some other issues, but I can’t remember exactly which. So I wrote something else. But thanks for the stimulation.

      Blog posts here are relatively fluff, even if it’s fun. Actually loads of fun! The real work will be done with researched pages. The docket here is a research page.

      One person told me that this was all not important, because Rossi will be a small detail in history. Maybe. That person also sent me a decently large check to support the work. Anonymous, but thanks. That’s why I’m sure I can go to Florida if there is a trial.

      What I suspect is that IH will prevail in shooting down the Rossi claims, but that there will be issues left in the counterclaims, though I have not completed my study. My opinion might change. If the main case is gone, there might then be some serious settlement negotiations. I don’t see that much value for IH in actually going to trial, if some reasonable settlements are possible. Rossi’s goose is already thoroughly cooked, it is not necessary to char it.

  2. You would have to wonder why the ‘Plaintiff’ (Rossi) did not want to agree to IH inspecting the Black Box area of JMP “under any circumstance” as was said in the draft document included in the link posted above,
    except for the fact that Rossi was still trying to uphold the illusion that a real production of a real product was being carried out in there which made the possibility of some real intellectual property of Johnson Matthey being stolen.
    As it now turns out, and as was strongly suspected by many at the time, Johnson Matthey wasn’t involved in any of it and was certainly not the parent company of JMP, there was no actual product of any sort being made by anyone, including JMP or Rossi ( same thing as it turns out, again not a surprise to most), and the only thing in the JMP area was a sealed black box with a simple pipe loop capable of dissipating maybe 10 to 15 kilowatts continuous. And even that is doubtfull.
    A continuous 15 kilowatts dissipation in such a small volume would have made it quite hot in there. But then, maybe that’s why it had to remain sealed, so nobody would walk in there and sustain burn injuries.
    Just reading through the list of documents in that link makes it so clear that a gigantic fraud was intended to be effected, to the extent that the whole litigation should be thrown out on the grounds of the clear intention of fraud.
    Why else was JMP set up?
    Why was there the deception involving Johnson Matthey?
    Why was there no process of any kind actually using the excess heat generated?
    Why wasn’t Rossi’s supposedly marvelous and all powerful partner IH, who had coughed up eleven million dollars and had every right to know exactly what was going on, kept in the dark about the reality of what the real situation was? i.e no real customer, no real product, and only maybe some excess heat? Rossi always said the results of the test could be positive or negative. Why lie about the rest?
    How on earth Mr Rossi can be writing on his blog that he is satisfied and confident with his case so far and how it is progressing is beyond logical belief.

    The other thing which is also beyond belief is how any of his loyal cheer squad can maintain any belief in anything that he says. And yet some are still trying to invent ways to justify where the 1 megawatt of heat went.
    I suppose it can only be on the same basis that they excused all the previous rubbish which was stated as fact and then found to be nothing but ‘B’ grade bovine excrement. That has been excused with the mindless platitude that it ‘was long in the past so stop dwelling on past trivialities because now we have the Hot cat, the Gas cat, the 1 megawatt plant, the all powerful new customer turning the Rossi row boat into a carrier,..’ ( Ooooh carrier!, he must mean ‘Carrier’ as in the big US manufacturing giant,. it just has to be,.. good grief!),… now where was I? Oh yes, still listing all the great new technologies supposedly invented by this genius, but still untested and unproven; the Curried Cat, the AC/DC light emitting 3 kilowatt cat of many colors, the conclusion of the One Year verification test with the final report by the independent entity for verification (shame it was an old Rossi stooge, shame it is clearly a load of carp!) , and the latest incarnation of the series, the climax of it all, the 20 watt Quackecat X. Yes, 20 watts, not 20 kilowatts.
    Oh well, let’s see what the court says.
    If I was Mr Rossi, I would be looking into seeking asylum in Russia.

    1. Pweet, here is a paper towel, to clean up the froth. The sink is over there. When you have cleaned it off, have a seat and we can have some tea or coffee, or what do you like? Rossi is not an ordinary person, and does not meet or match “normal expectations.”

      A load of carp might be quite useful, if it is fresh. As it gets old, maybe it would not be so attractive, even worse than manure. The weather here is great, and I’m thinking about what it might be like in Miami in late June.

      I’m certainly hoping that by June, there will be no load of carp carried into the courtroom. I suppose if it gets too bad, I could just go for a walk. Maybe have something other than fish for lunch.

      1. Oh thanks for that. I’m all better now. Too much dark chocolate, full of caffeine you know.
        Just for the record, a load of carp stinks to high heaven, no matter how it’s spelled.

    2. Pweet wrote:

      “A continuous 15 kilowatts dissipation in such a small volume would have made it quite hot in there. But then, maybe that’s why it had to remain sealed, so nobody would walk in there and sustain burn injuries.”

      Sorry to quibble, but I think you are wrong about the burn injuries. I grew up in 19th century houses with hot water radiators. The furnaces were about 100,000 btu, or 30 kW. That’s bigger than today’s heaters, because the houses were not insulated. There were 10 or 20 hot water or steam radiators. Here are some photos of them:

      They produce 1 or 2 kW, depending on the size of the radiator. Anyway, they do not produce burn injuries. You could sit them. I often did, wearing wet clothes. The total surface area of the radiators was roughly the same as the gadget in Rossi’s customer site, so the surface would be no hotter than those radiators.

      Those radiators would keep a house warm enough in winter, but the HVAC system in a large warehouse could remove that much heat even in summer. It would work overtime. It would be like having two or three kitchen stoves running full blast, full time. The landlord would see the air conditioning bill was high. It would be hot inside the pretend customer site, but probably the rest of the warehouse would be normal.

      Another way to estimate this is that 20 kW is how much heat 200 people in a movie theater generate, from metabolism. That does not overwhelm the air conditioning.

  3. Rends had somewhat cleaned up his act after stinking up the place last summer and fall but I guess that just couldn’t last. He has quickly returned to relegated idiot status right along side LFH Sam and Alan. L.F. ownership would be wise to remove all three of those pollution propagating ninny-muggened knuckleheads from any position of power on their blog.

    1. First are you Dewey? This message cast doubt on that.
      If so, I’m shocked to see again someone in your honorable position of LENR investor, fighting against a perceived scam artist, behaving like the usual toxic trolls we see on LF.
      Alan reactions are based on formal problems, like insults, doxxing, bandwidth, and basically ability to respond to offline remarks to calm down. It s even hard for me to understand his real position, a good sign.
      Rend have opinion, opposite to mine, but does not abuse of it to silent opinions.
      Sam is working hard to provide, with Alan, tools for research, and as an entrepreneur you surely appreciate this.

      1. Alainco – It’s me and I’m right about all three of those bozos. They do not have the judgement or intelligence to be moderating your forum and are positioned to further damage L.F. as LENR starts to grow up in the post-Rossi era. Their bias and jaded view of reality is of little value and continues to stain your venue. With apologies for the bluntness – you should heed this advice and get rid of all three of them.

        1. Dewey, Alain does not have the authority to “get rid of them,” nor would I support that. However, Alan Smith as moderator was and remains a disaster. There was very good reason to invite or encourage his participation on LF, because of his business, but this also created a clear conflict of interest. Rossi goes down, most of the reason to think NiH so exciting goes down.

          LFH Sam is naive, isn’t he Alan’s brother?

          Rends is an LF moderator but I have not seen him abusing moderation tools. However, Alan has claimed majority Staff support for his abuse. Every little bit helps, but every little bit can also hurt. Some of Alan’s earlier abuse appeared to be protecting Rends when he posted his conspiracy rants.

          LF Administration is quite obscure, the opposite of transparent. The users banned a couple of weeks ago are unbanned now. Several old bans remain, and these have never been explained to the community. One appears to have been because the fellow was critical of Rossi, but that is merely a guess. And the other is me, of course. Why was I banned? Part of the answer would be, I’d guess, that I started this blog and said some things on it that were not liked. I think I allegedly doxxed someone, but the person I supposedly doxxed doesn’t seem upset.

          My opinion is that it was actually personal. There used to be a claimed TOS on LF, and policy was established about banning. Which was then ignored. Does that page still exist? I should check.

          1. Why was I banned? Part of the answer would be, I’d guess, that I started this blog and said some things on it that were not liked. I think I allegedly doxxed someone, but the person I supposedly doxxed doesn’t seem upset.

            Abd – you are wise and I think correct in what you say below about Dewey. When it comes to forums – rather than people – you have less tolerance. Even though forums are run by people. LF now probably does not like you because you rate it lower than ECW in the blogroll rating. I’d be annoyed at that, too! And in my judgement it is no way merited. ECW is heavily moderated according to views about Rossi, but considers itself to have a fair discussion of Rossi. That is very strange and one of the perils of any moderation based on post content rather than post politeness.

            As for whether you are still banned at LF. Are you sure? I was not aware of that. It seems strange.

            1. Yes, I am still banned. You can tell who is banned, if you look at the list of members. Members who are banned have a lock symbol showing. The list of members shows all members in order of number of posts. I am shown on the first page, and you can see the lock. I did just notice that they apparently unbanned H-G Branzell. But Keieueue is still banned.

              I think the idea that LF may not like me because I rate it lower than ECW is hilarious. Those ratings were created after I was “permanently” banned.Yes, ECW is heavily moderated, but look at the name. E-Cat World might as well be “Planet Rossi.” I am not banned there, though I’m on moderation — which I think silly, but if Frank wants to waste his time approving posts that would almost always be acceptable — very, very few posts have been deleted, it is well under 1% — it is fully his privilege. The rules are explicit there, even if enforced in a ragged manner. LF pretends to be more open, and perhaps it is, in some ways. But the unwritten rule is do not gore the sacred oxen of Staff, or the staff member can ban you. They have not figured out recusal, Wikipedia did all that more than ten years ago.

              Politeness isn’t everything. For discussions intended to generate consensus, moderation — I’d prefer to call it “facilitation” — can be important. There has not yet been generated enough community here for what I know about that process to be put to the test, but I have decades of experience at it, both on–line and face-to-face.

              Nobody is banned from deliberative assemblies for being rude. They might be censured. However, the chair may ask a member to sit down. If the member will not sit down and shut up, the chair may ask the member to leave the room temporarily, and if necessary, the sergeant-at-arms assists the member in leaving. Generally, they can come back as soon as they agree to follow the rules as interpreted by the chair. They may appeal the chair’s decisions, etc., there are rules for all of that. Mostly, on-line communities are clueless about how all this is done in the real world. In true democratic assemblies, the assembly itself is always the ultimate authority. We just saw this in the U.S. Senate, even if it was an unfortunate demonstration because it was trashing long traditions of requiring supermajority to close debate — which is quite standard, so the Senate is abandoning traditional democracy. The authority to interpret the rules is with the majority, always. If the majority is unwise, it then may abuse this. The penalty under some conditions could be civil war. Close majorities are quite dangerous! 2:1 is traditional.

              but I digress.

      2. My condolences, Alain. Your model of Dewey may be defective. He has always been outspoken. Being banned does not generally suppress this with self-expressed people. Dewey has a job (well, contract) to die for, working with LENR researchers, but he also suffered from watching Rossi defraud IH and his friends for too many years. He has known, for much longer than you, what a load of carp (got that today from Pweet, I like it) Rossi had been delivering to the naive for years, the naive and also people who were not naive, but willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

        He screwed them over, he lied and cheated and continues. I can easily understand why someone might get a tad … uncivil … having gone through that.

        Blog pages here are free meetings for free people. I will enforce some level of decorum here, pending the development of community structures for that. Communities have the right to regulate behavior, and people have the right to be free. We find ways to create and support both of these.

        Research pages here may have different standards.

          1. Sam,

            I’d agree. But Dewey is honest, and says what he means. Rossi is dishonest and prepared to twist facts as needed to make a point – more than anyone else I’ve ever observed.

            Who would you want on your team?

        1. No problem, I understand, even when it is not fair for others, not good for oneself… I’ve done my own crimes.
          About Rossi, I think he have a capacity to manipulate and exploit the best in people, enthusiasm, entrepreneurship, imagination, hard work, trust, hope…

          I see what happen in Levantine zone, and I am happy nobody was killed here.

          When the war will be finished and the convicted hanged, we will have to go back to serious work…

          If it is not on the blockchain, I cannot do more than supporting entrepreneurs and researchers with words.

          F… the war!

    2. Dewey, were you anyone else, I’d be reluctant to allow this. On the other hand, you are rather simply calling a spade a spade, though with colorful language. I would allow Rossi himself to make statements like this about me, about “snakes” and “clowns,” about you. If any of those “idiots” showed up here, I’d moderate discussions toward the goal of creating something useful. For now, you may post here like this, and we will thank you for honestly sharing your opinions. The problem with the probably Rossi socks on LF is that they pretend to be independent, just as Rossi pretended that JMP was independent. And then there are the naive supporters. You’ve been a bit hard on some of them, and it’s doesn’t land well.

      If I see someone socking here, using more than one name or account to pretend more support than honestly exists, I’d handle it, though not necessarily by a true ban. I do want all points of view represented, and we can sort and organize later.

      LF ownership is quite obtuse and obscure. Expecting it to be wise may be a bit much. In any case, as I think you know, you are most welcome here. You have special knowledge, and the future will thank you for what you may reveal. Lies fall back and splatter the liars with mud, truth creates its own special world. All the best to those who seek to serve it.

Leave a Reply