Well, I’ve been reviewing Planet Rossi tropes, minding my own business in my “little blog,” — actually it’s a community blog, we get there one step at a time — and apparently I attracted the attention of ele, possible Rossi sock or likely Rossi insider (taking the place of randombit0), on LENR forum. It’s not quite the honor of being noticed on Rossi’s own blog, JONP, but there he did not use my name. Here he did. a poco a poco andiamo lontano.
Summary: to avoid facing his own lies, ele asserts that Cherokee is Bad, but, of course, attributes this opinion to a probably anonymous (fake name) poster on his blog, er, Rossi’s blog, which he just happened to notice. Purely coincidental, mind you. My ass.
I raise this only because you have made so many documented false statements here…
THH or the statements are false or are documented. Tertium non datur
There was a clearly false statement that ele made, documented in detail in the place THH cited, which was this blog. Tertium no datur is the excluded middle, a reference to a logical fallacy; the use of this here is unclear.
However, I will assert a middle to the proposition that ele is Rossi, or not. The middle is that Rossi writes things and then gives them to someone else with better English to edit — and maybe to post. The sign of this is that the English is better, but the density of Rossi tropes is high. An alternate explanation is someone who is a thoroughly dedicated fan of Rossi and who is writing to please him. Maybe.
I inserted that link just because it could be interesting for many readers here to at least know that there exist a version of the fact published by Rossi himself.
Someone criticized the link because it was Rossi asserting the history. There was nothing wrong, in itself, with giving that link; however, first of all, this was in response to a request for evidence, and someone with sense would know that RossiSays would not be considered much evidence, yet, what RossiSays is indeed some level of evidence. Mats Lewan gives a little more; the problem here is that what Rossi said on that site did not support what ele claimed, but actually contradicted it, and so did Lewan’s account, which was quoted.
I am completely ruined by watching the dead parrot sketch today, which, of course, has nothing whatever to do with this. See the Macaw post here for details of that nothing.
Abd was banned from here because of his insults. Is quite an honor to be personally insulted on his personal little blog.
Liars consider the truth an insult. Here, ele asserts his first lie in this post. What insults? I was banned here because I declared I was boycotting the site because of posts being deleted without warning, notice, or adequate cause. So I was banned by the moderator who was deleting posts. So I just called this a “lie.” To be sure, it is possible that ele believes what he wrote, which would make it not a lie but simply an error. However, ele has a pattern of making such “careless” mistakes.
As to the honor, no problem. Enjoy it in good health.
Surfing the net I have also found some interesting link about Darden gang criminal behavior.
Perhaps two lies here. The second is clear: the links he will show do not establish any criminal behavior, and contain many falsehoods, Planet Rossi tropes echoing what the Man himself has written.
Seems provided by a guy who published a long comment in the JONP. I normally do not read Rossi’s blog but found that googling through a site called Rossi Blog Reader.
That’s incoherent and probably made up to explain away what someone might think, all useless and a waste of data.
I propose here the full original post:
Rossi-ism, using propose in this way. A colloquial English writer would not say it that way. It’s understandable and not wrong, but more standard would be, if one is going to use “propose” at all, it’s a bit archaic, “I propose for the reader’s consideration the full original post.”
And of course he proposes it, it is what he wants to say…. but why? What does this have to do with anything here?
The connection is common on Planet Rossi, and I recently covered it, I think Ahlfors brought it up.
Hugh H. Maguire
May 8, 2017 at 9:11 AM
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I’ve been following your tracks on and off for more than two years now. When the news of your lawsuit with Cherokee Investment Partners and their subsidiary Industrial Heat reached the public scene, I was not all that surprised. There are at least two known instances in which Cherokee Investment Partners, acting through companies they controlled, were involved in bankruptcies after being funded for reclamation and development programmes they did not complete. Main links may be found here (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10…ew-jersey-style.html?_r=0) and here (http://www.postandcourier.com/…63-a818-6c0a67cdfa5f.html), but there are others, as the stories are well known.
The claim about “not surprised” is almost certainly false. “Hugh” would have had to know about those otherwise obscure Cherokee “facts.” This “news” was all over the blogs once the lawsuit was filed and people like Sifferkoll started dredging the net, looking for dirt. Rossi tropes here: the claim that Industrial Heat is a “subsidiary” of Cherokee, which was a critical allegation in the Rossi lawsuit, and because Rossi asserted that — it wasn’t true at all — his suit against Cherokee survived the Motion to Dismiss. That will come back to bite him.
I had written extensively in the past about these stories, last year, on LENR Forum, as I recall. These same claims showed up on E-Cat world, and, May 13, I was asked a question here on the blog about them. That question gave four news sources, actually. In my answer, which follows that comment, I tracked down far more information than had been alleged, so I’m not repeating that here.
And none of this is relevant to Rossi v. Darden, because Cherokee Investment Partners is not and was not an investor in Industrial Heat (in the cited bankruptcies, Cherokee was an investor, a relatively large one (which means they lost money), but the claim that Cherokee controlled those LLCs has not been substantiated and seems to be possibly incorrect. But to fully research this would take time, and nobody is paying me to do this….
At this point I ask myself: is it possible that IH’s refusal to pay you the agreed fees for licensing your technology, after running an undisputed test for over one year (during which its employees were always present, subsequent to taking part in the construction of the power plant itself), and paying the relevant fees to Mr Penon as consultant on the operation of the plant, is part of a long-term plan targeted from its very inception not just at yourself, but at outside investment partners?
First of all, the description of the nonpayment is totally Planet Rossi and very unlikely to be sustained at trial. The descriptions match quite closely what Rossi wrote on his blog until he started getting flak from his attorneys. Making the point about “employees present,” for example, claiming that the “test” was “undisputed” — when we now know that there were disputes and complaints. Penon was paid, yes, even when they were disputing the report. They had agreed to pay and that payment was not conditional on their trust in the report. What does that have to do with the claims here? This is all Rossi grandstanding.
We, as the public, are now aware that the Doral site was visited in February 2015 by Woodford, well-known in the UK as a high-profile investment management company, and that Woodford was apparently convinced of the technology, to the point of investing approximately £32m in IH.
We now know that the Woodford investment ($50 million US, quite exactly) was already assured in 2014, see the Ampenergo notes. While the Ampenergo notes report what Vaughn was saying then, these notes are uncontradicted and consistent with much other evidence, including emails and depositions. Woodford was impressed, not by Rossi technology, but showed, by where they put their money, trust in Darden, not Rossi, who apparently did not impress them personally. Rossi’s stories about that visit are no more reliable than the rest of RossiSays.
But I’m sure they were polite, IH was dedicated, at that point, to not upsetting Rossi. They told Cassarino of Ampenergo what was going on, and Cassarino apparently attempted to negotiate something with Rossi about the ERV or other “test” issues. It was understood, according to Cassarino, in his deposition, that IH would not be paying Rossi more, unless they could replicate, proving that the IP transfer was complete, something the Doral “test” could not accomplish. They all knew — and Rossi acknowledged that he knew — that the Second Amendment allowing the Guaranteed Performance Test to be done later had been “cancelled,” because Ampenergo refused to sign.
Planet Rossi simply refuses to accept obvious fact, but relies on vague understandings and imaginations that will not fly in court.
It stands to reason that, if the issue of litigation turns out unfavourably, IH might be tempted to file for bankruptcy, just like EnCap, Ashley I, and Ashley II.
They might not simply be tempted, if they were facing a large judgment, they would file for protection, at least, (Chapter 11), and possibly for full bankruptcy. That’s how LLCs operate! (The name means “Limited Liability Company.” That is how corporations operate!) This is utterly generic, and not actually related to Cherokee. The only reason for bankruptcy here would be that Industrial Heat invested their entire initial share offering ($20 million) and more, in Rossi, who gave them nothing useful in return (i.e., something they could sell without themselves committing fraud), and who then is suing them for $89 million and triple damages for fraud. If he ends up with a mouthful of hair, it would be totally just and fair. If he could penetrate the corporate veil and obtain judgments against Darden and Vaughn, and more so against Cherokee, there might be no bankruptcy (I don’t know about the personal wealth of Darden and Vaughn). However, I see absolutely no basis in the evidence adduced so far in Rossi v. Darden that would support a claim of fraud on their part. Fraud in the other direction is a practical certainty, or at least fraudulent representation.
When Woodford invested, they deliberately placed their funds out of Rossi’s reach. They actually committed up to $200 million, so if Rossi had actually done what Ampenergo wanted him to do, actually satisfy what IH needed in order to be able to move forward, the money was there not only to pay him but to push commercial development forward. Voluntarily. That point is made by Cassarino.
(If readers don’t know who Cassarino is, he is a principal at Ampenergo, Rossi’s major long-time supporter and his U.S. Licensee before IH. Ampenergo was paid millions of dollars by IH to compensate them for their License, and was to be paid much more if Rossi obtained the $89 million. Cassarino obviously trusted IH, and knew how difficult it was to deal with Rossi.)
Let’s put it this way: if Rossi has a real technology, which is not looking at all likely at this point, he completely blew it, shot himself in the foot, sawed off the tree branch he was sitting on.
And yet somehow remain in possession of the know-how related to your technology, which may have already been leaked to other companies involved in LENR research: the ones Cherokee or their subsidiaries have reportedly (Brillouin?) invested in.
Rossi is massively confused on all this and the comment reflects his confusion. Rossi would have major claims against IPH (which holds the License). IPH would not be able to profit without it going to Rossi.
At this point, it would be just a matter of window-dressing on the patent market. I am by no means a conspiracy advocate, but I find these facts extremely disturbing.
What facts? There are two kinds of statements made here, fact and implication. The facts are simply about how businesses operate, and how Cherokee has operated, albeit presented in ways that show no understanding.
Corporations have no morals, no matter how appealing their public facade might appear.
And what about the morals of anonymous blog posters, who libel others as if immune and above it all? Corporations are legal fictions, and legal fictions don’t have morals. People do. Some people routinely lie, some don’t. We are each responsible for our own behavior.
When one is willing to charge even one’s own inside clients for unjustified expenses (http://www.bizjournals.com/tri…ners-reaches-100-000.html), there are no limits to the extent of possible malversation.
The “unjustified expenses” is covered at Misc Mash, search the page for “Cherokee.” There was a rule change, there were compliance expenses, and Cherokee incorrectly charged those expenses. The expenses were not “unjustified.” They were simply allocated incorrectly to managed funds, as I recall. They settled with the SEC. Cherokee is involved in complex projects and these things do happen.
When one makes a minor accounting error, it indicates no limits to “malversation”? (I don’t know what malversation is, but it sounds Really Bad. Okay, looked it up. “corrupt behavior in a position of trust, especially in public office.”) The newspaper account cited by Hugh does not consider this any kind of scandal, and the story is actually that Cherokee settled. Because all the improper transactions were reversed, the only harm was that $100,000 of Cherokee assets went to the SEC. I wrote that this was like me being fined a nickel.
What may be relevant, Rossi asserted the SEC documents on this in his exhibit list, number 111. There is no way that would be allowed in court, but, obviously, this is very meaningful to Rossi.
Sincerely, Hugh H. Maguire.
Nice material . I think that a full read of the proposed links will be quite interesting.
I had already studied these articles in detail. If there are any questions, ask! If I don’t know answers, someone else might. The main thing here, as to Planet Rossi, is Rossi’s long-standing distrust of corporations, that is, in my opinion, what allowed him to fall into such difficulties in Italy, because when trouble came up, he had no backing. That is, of course, assuming that he was not a pure con, assuming that PetrolDragon was a real technology and not just a scam. PetrolDragon certainly could have been real. But how did Rossi conduct business in the real world?
More on JONP:
What I mostly can’t stand is that Cherokee & Partners use charity organizations as a cover for illegal operations…and there is more upon this side of them.
This is evidence-free innuendo. What charity organizations are being used by Cherokee as a cover for illegal operations? How? What illegal operations? (No illegal operations were asserted in all those articles, unless we want to call an accounting error an “illegal operation.”)Evidence?
And then there is:
May 16, 2017 at 5:23 AM
Dr Andrea Rossi:
The puppets of the ventriloquist of Raleigh are continuing to talk in the blogs of your past, which makes two considerations pop up:
First consideration: they use your past because they have not real evidence against you for the litigation, otherwise they would not lose time for archeology (they cite events of 25 years and more ago)
Second: you have been completely cleared from your taxes issues in Italy and from all the accusations that caused you to go in jail and they know it, but pretend not to know to try to assassinate your character with fraudolent biased journalism
Third: being the ventriloquist Tom Darden and the pious JT Vaughn so obstentatiously gracious guys, they should read the Gospel where Jesus says “Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”: I invite the Ventriloquist and the Pious to read the comment sent to this blog from Hugh H. Maguire about a week ago, where are reported the links to the criminal customary activity of Cherokee, that is the mother of Industrial Heat: there we can see that also the “charity” organizations of Cherokee are covers for criminal activity. I am sure that more investigation on this specific issue could reserve stunning surprises.
And to them who want to know the real story about your past, I suggest to go to http://www.ingandrearossi.com
Ing. Carlo Antonini
I had not noticed much discussion of Rossi’s past. Ahlfors made a reference to claims about Rossi being convicted, but he was actually making a point about Joe Pike (which ele completely did not understand, or pretended not to understand, Rossi certainly met Pike), and my own involvement here was simply to note the deceptive statement, the lie, which in this case means a claim, persistent, that the claimant would reasonably know was false. Rossi was not found “innocent of all crimes,” and he served time for his five convictions. That’s just fact, even though the contrary has recently been repeated.
I never accepted the idea that Rossi’s past meant it was impossible for him to have a real technology, nor did it show that he must be lying now. I claim he is lying now because he is contradicting clear evidence, he cites evidence to defend himself that contradicts his claims as well, he misrepresents what others have written, he is either careless about it or really doesn’t care about truth, only about the Rossi Story, the impression he wants to create.
Rossi is obsessed with his past. IH effectively trolled him by raising the tax issue. He obviously went ballistic, wasting a great deal of lawyer time fighting the obvious. He doesn’t want it mentioned that he had tax difficulties in the past, and if he had fulfilled the License Agreement provisions about taxes, it would have been quite enough to simply assert that with no fuss. Instead he accused Jones Day of misbehavior, etc.
Rossi seems to have a big problem handling, ah, paperwork. There is example after example in the history. People with the money he had would normally hire someone to handle it all. What happened? And how is it that the License Agreement was with Leonardo New Hampshire, while Rossi v. Darden was filed by Leonardo Florida, but the alleged merger was not revealed in the Complaint, Leonardo New Hampshire still exists, the evidence cited by Leonardo for the merger was the original incorporation of Leonardo Florida from 2011, well before the License agreement.
The word that comes to mind is dementia.
Mats wrote that Rossi seemed to want to be seen as a con artist. He succeeded. The reality? God knows it best.