RE: MickeyMouse.17 Sep 2025 15:02
Hi Mickey, I am reposting this from yesterday, since you did not understand it. Ask an educated person to explain it to you.
'What a lying, uneducated POS you really are, You are now deflecting on Googling so much, that is your entire post, again. I misspelt cartoon in my post. oh dear oh dear.what a naughty boy. So you pathological liar, you assume I misspell every time I use it. You absolute fool. And for your information, my downloaded version of Google, directs people to another similar word in the case of misspelling. But you should already know that you fool.'
And, of course, when you googled it, you used he 'key words', 'Phineas Qauyle', something you failed to tell me when you explained your narcissistic alter ego name.
'
I know facts hurt you, but do overcome your narcissistic, authoritarian attitude, and attempt debate at a mature level. BTW, no mention of me punishing your 'Castle banishment'. We all know why..
You get better. Paul stood at AGM, an event meant to highlight Cos. achievement in year, and says ' customers feedstock has been tested', and you hang on it, as you are paid to do, and instructed to do, like it's the word of God. However, when he said there would be no fund raise, and he did the same the very next day, the best spin you had on that was it was 'clumsy' hahaha. Not a lie, not misleading, but as though he has stubbed his toe on chair leg. You do not spin as well as Karoline Leavitt. Google it.
But full marks for this spin.
'• RNS language = boilerplate legal caution. Phrases such as “potentially” and “once fully commissioned” are standard hedge-clauses. They do not magically erase what was said aloud at the AGM. You’re conflating careful corporate phrasing with scandal. That’s sloppy, not brilliant.'
Below is a copy from the first paragraph, under 'Highlights' and Corporate'
. 'Business strategy remains focused on licensing fees, royalties and engineering services revenues which include potentially providing third party testing of waste streams at the Powerhouse Technology Centre once fully commissioned.'
You actually believe your lies yourself don't you. ? What a fool. Even lies to himself.
I know your reply will only be deflection, answering nothing, but 2 things PHE subjects deserve a reply from you.
Both you, and your partner in misleading information, have made much of Engsolved income. You have also made much of their work in commissioning FTU. How much of the reported income for Engsolve was FTU related? Ask Paul, it can't be the subject of a NDA can it?
Your comment that FTU was not a #commercial' operation. Have a word with yourself, and yr partner. You have both said, 'it is been packaged up for sale'. Avioxx I think. Spin please Mickey. Not an order, just a request.