Patient, Persistent, Stubborn, Fanatic

I’m okay if my enemy is bad continued covering this obsession, that if it can be shown that Cherokee Investment Partners are bad in some way, this will help Rossi’s cause. The drumbeat was maintained on Rossi’s blog:

June 10, 2017 at 9:06 PM


June 10, 2017 at 9:50 PM


Readily noticed: when someone puts up obvious errors on, say,, it is normal for another user to correct them. Yet here, “Leanne” makes a post dense with error — such as the idea that Cherokee built houses on the Zeneca/Campus Bay property — and it is simply praised. The user names on JONP, except for a few ECW users who post there from time to time, and who use very different language and concepts from the ones we think may be Rossi socks, show a radical difference. While ECW is explicitly intended for E-Cat supporters, and it does repeat many Planet Rossi memes, it is more normal repetition from people who simply believe or trust that Rossi’s work is real. The JONP claque is not that (again, setting aside the distinct users who ask Rossi questions, etc., like Frank Acland and some others). It is, as it were, fanatic.

E. Zatopek
June 11, 2017 at 3:30 PM

Dr Rossi,
The ventriloquist never thought this trial was going to
be heard by an honorable Jury.
Victory is right around the corner. Never give up.

Ultimately, Rossi is boring. “Ventriloquist” is an oft-repeated Planet Rossi meme for Darden; however, Darden has expressed no opinions on the subject of whether or not the case would go to jury. (My own opinion was, as I’ve expressed, that Rossi’s primary case would be dismissed on Summary Judgment, or part of it, but that other matters would still be presented to a jury.) Darden, as far as we know, is not telling anyone what to say or think. There is only one regular participant in discussions who is in communication with Darden, and that’s Dewey Weaver, and I don’t recall Dewey Weaver predicting that the case would not go to a jury. Maybe he did, but, if so, I missed it.

Dewey Weaver does not sound or write like Darden, what we have from Darden, at all. Yet Rossi has obvious puppets who, not surprisingly, sound like like, use his language and concepts, far more closely than seen with any other group. Some attempted to protest the usage of “Planet Rossi” — though that is not, in itself, pejorative — by using “Planet IH.” But there is no such extensive coherence of ideas and language, there is only what we would expect from people who have studied the same thing and may have similar ideas.

I do use “Planet Rossi” to include many who write on ECW, but … Planet Rossi is a broad term, and it does not mean “Rossi puppets.” Yet Rossi and his puppets do frequently assert “puppetry,” where, in fact, the only common theme of these “puppets” is critique of Rossi.

Emanuel Cirelli
June 12, 2017 at 11:26 AM

Fantastic discovery, at last the king is naked, as somebody said.

This all appears to be intended to counter worship of Darden as savior of the planet, but … I don’t see anyone doing that. We will see this theme become more explicit on LENR Forum, with the claque there.

As well, the stories and documents found don’t mention Darden. Some of them reveal Cherokee Investment Partners as having invested in Campus Bay. The most that I see in the documents revealed (and many others I have reviewed) is that Cherokee underestimated cleanup costs, but contrary to the stories promoted by Planet Rossi, they are not in legal trouble. They are technically and conditionally liable, but not as Cherokee, rather as Cherokee Simeon Ventures I, which limits possible losses to their investment (not a known figure, but my guess is about $25 million — though it may be less). They did not go into bankruptcy as had been claimed. (A case was filed and then dismissed at their motion.)

Their partner, formerly known as Zeneca, is a huge pharmaceutical company that had set aside $100 million for remediation, and is actually responsible, from before, and had, before Cherokee invested, spent some of this on a plan that they imagined would save money, but didn’t, and which may have made the situation somewhat worse. The real toxic waste disposal problem was quite old. So “the king is naked”? Someone has a strange imagination. Who is the little boy and what does he see?

Cristin Kozan
June 12, 2017 at 11:50 AM

Dr Andrea Rossi,
The ventriloquist says Cherokee Investment Partners has been a victim of the environmental disaster of Richmond, California…after they made all the money disappear…isn’t it funny?

What money? ele, the probable current Rossi account on LENR Forum, provided a list of “awards” to a Cherokee-affiliated finance company, seeming to think that Cherokee was getting more than $50 million per year in “taxpayer money.” Planet Rossi is not known for clear intelligence. Those were tax credits, not cash grants, to encourage investment in brownfield projects. This was all long after, as far as anything I’ve seen, the Cherokee Simeon Venture I project and probably had nothing to do with it . There are no claims of missing money outstanding with any Cherokee project. Except, of course, from Planet Rossi, which seems to think that Darden has this magic that makes money disappear, allegedly $250 million raised by Industrial Heat by bragging about Rossi’s reactors, all of which was old rumors, misunderstood, apparently (and not supported by case documents, contrary to ele claims. There was only $50 million from Woodford, which didn’t go to Industrial Heat, but rather to the new parent company and it appears that much of it is still there, much as cash, the rest as assets (which might, of course, be of unclear value: a major asset would be the Rossi License, what is that worth?)

I thought that “they say” may have been a reference to me, I may have pointed out at some point that Cherokee lost money, but I didn’t call them a “victim.” They take on risky remediation projects and apparently do quite well with them, on average. It is not clear what the ultimate outcome will be of the Campus Bay project.

However, others have pointed out something similar. In one old case, the Enfield project, Cherokee sued a former project officer for embezzlement, which may have contributed to that project failure. What Planet Rossi has been doing for some time is dredging up anything that might make Cherokee look bad as long as one squints. Unsavory exercise of political contributions. Failed project that had raised public money as grants, where there was shoddy oversight and so an investigative reporter tossed some mud. No follow-up has been found showing any improper Cherokee behavior. Just accusations with no resolution. Very Planet Rossi.

I could look at the discussions of ele on LENR Forum, but, today, this is enough. Basically, those who are accusing others of being “puppets” and lying … are lying. ele attacks Dewey Weaver, of course, but Dewey Weaver, like Jed Rothwell, myself, and quite a few others are real people using real names and responsible for what we say. Who is “ele”?

On Planet Rossi, at the center, Rossi himself, lies and deception are normal and excusable, and so Rossi would want to accuse everyone else of it. But the Rossi v. Darden record doesn’t show any lies on the IH side and many on the Rossi side, even dragging in others, inducing them to collaborate in deception: certainly Bass was so induced, Johnson appears to have allowed the Johnson Matthey idea, not contradicting Rossi though he knew much more than was revealed to Industrial Heat, and then Fabiani seems a tragic case, how much he knew is unclear, but he was loyal to the liar-in-chief and destroyed data.

I know people who knew and trusted Rossi. He betrayed them.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Author: Abd ulRahman Lomax


2 thoughts on “Patient, Persistent, Stubborn, Fanatic”

  1. I think Rossi publishes all those lame-brained comments on his blog, be they authored by him or his puppets, so that if/when he finally gets a ‘working over’ by the legal system in his upcoming court case, which he initiated by the way, then his loyal followers can be filled with righteous indignation over how such a travesty of justice (to their way of thinking) can occur. In the absence of all these ridiculous and erroneous postings, his followers might be tempted to believe what the evidence clearly shows, and that is, Mr Rossi constructed an elaborate hoax and kept it all under his strict supervision and control in an attempt to extract by deception a further 89 million dollars from IH.
    If this was not the case, why didn’t he allow IH to perform some independent testing of the 1MW plant by a customer of their own choosing, at a place of their own choosing? ‘Oh, that wouldn’t look as convincing as an independent customer producing a real product.’ ,.. he said.
    Why did Rossi think that a test carried out by himself for a fake customer who turned out to be himself, and producing nothing other than a few kilowatts worth of hot air floating out a ceiling vent, would be any more convincing to the outside world than one performed by IH for any customer of IH? I appreciate that would not have been ideal but infinitely better than the alternative ludicrous circumstance which has now been made public.

    I think all these fake postings on his blog, which are in all likelihood as unreal as Rossi’s fake JM Products e-cat customer, are entirely for the purpose of maintaining his loyal following as a base from which he can kick his e-cat down the road for another extended period, when the court officially concludes it was all a big con job.
    Rossi and his followers will claim it was all a big conspiracy orchestrated by the mysterious ‘them’ and ‘they’ who seem to have the power and uncanny ability to organize and execute all these oppressive plots without penalty, and still remain anonymous. It certainly won’t be by Donald Trump. He can’t even grope a ladies crotch without it being plastered all over the media. (the groping that is, not the crotch. Well, maybe both.)

    My guess is, as soon as the court case is over and the dust has settled, before his last loyal fans run out the door and turn out the lights, he will do another one of his grand demonstrations of the even more amazing quackecat-X , at which point his adoring fans will run back in and resume their seats to follow the next act featuring his next shiny new thing. So long as it is not lost somewhere between here and Sigma 5 that is.
    Where is Sigma 5 anyway? Wherever it is, Mr Rossi is still on his way there, sometimes marching apparently, so I hope he makes it back in time for June 26th.
    I confidently predict the amazingly high COP of the Quackecat X will be as fake as all his previous results. It will be fun to see how he does it though so I stay tuned.

    1. Here is a generally cogent comment from THH on LENR Forum. I would disagree with the implications of his conclusion:

      A second IH problem was complacency. They reckoned, because the 1 year test so clearly did not comply with the legal terms of the GPT, and Rossi asked for it as a customer demo, not a GPT, they were in the clear. They could keep Rossi happy by letting him run it. If the device did work they had made sure (Casserino notes) they could pay whatever was needed to keep Rossi happy. If it did not who cares, Rossi is in no position to sue.

      They found to their cost that was a miscalculation

      They are in the business of taking risks. When there are probabilities, but an outcome is not what was considered probable, that is not strong evidence that the calculations were incorrect, one would need to look much more carefully. Could they have known that Rossi would be so crazy as to sue them? Had he done this before? (No. He walked away from agreements, many times, never pushed the way he did with IH. Then again, he never had an $89 million carrot before. How could one predict this?)

      There is a Law360 article on the case that I will be analyzing. Altonaga’s reason for dismissing the motions for summary judgment was highly defective legally, because it did not examine the legal arguments and accept or reject them. It assumed that the facts necessary for Summary Judgment were “disputed,” i.e., that there was a conflict of admissible evidence, when — at least in my opinion — there were sufficient uncontested facts to grant at least some of the requests. So perhaps she threw out the baby with the bathwater. She confused “disputed” with “contested,” treating facts as disputed when no contrary evidence was presented adequate to require a jury resolution.

      Judicial frustration with the behavior of the parties is not a sound argument for dismissal of soundly-based motions. If motions are defective, such that they cannot be granted, the decision would properly explain the defects. She actually did that with the Motions for Dismissal — and there, she wanted to wait to see if evidence would develop in discovery. Discovery took place. There was evidence and absence of evidence. I think she erred, as to the facts, but she also erred as to procedure.

      There would have been a trial anyway, unless a dismissal of the primary cause of action motivated the parties to settle, establishing limits and a better sense of probabilities. I don’t see that, for example, the liability of Johnson could be established without a trial. These conditions exist, in particular, where there may be perjured testimony. This is, in fact, why perjury is a crime, it is not merely a presentation of defective arguments and conclusions, it is deception and the creation of confusion, causing substantial social damage. Some of Rossi’s self-serving interpretations, as I read them, went too far, straying into falsely alleged fact, an example being that he claims to have never claimed that Johnson Matthey was the customer. It’s completely obvious from the evidence that such an idea was strong, it was discussed by many, including Bass (who apparently believed it) and Rossi’s answers were clearly scripted to allow the impression to continue, while creating a (very small) level of legal deniability, as can be seen in the Annesser and Chaiken arguments.

      But no jury would fail to notice the deception in the light of known fact. The Rossi demand not to contact Johnson Matthey — that is uncontested evidence — was clearly designed to prevent IH from discerning the truth. If JM was not actually the “real customer,” the “real party of interest” behind JMC/JMP, Rossi could simply have said “It’s not them.” Instead, he wrote “I wasn’t supposed to say anything.”

      This is blatant and obvious, and there are quite a few examples like that.

      I was notified of the Law360 article by David Nygren through the LF shoutbox, though this really would have been more appropriate for the RvD Developments thread, and I recovered the article from Google cache. (I had a free subscription for a time, but that expired.) In any case, thanks, David, and thanks, bocijn, for reminding me of the cache trick; I do use cache to recover pages that are taken down, but had not realized that it would show the full page for a time in this case.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WordPress Anti Spam by WP-SpamShield