Massino Mazzucco

[JLord]

I was surprised that a forum search gave zero results for this person:

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

He is an Italian filmmaker who was on coast to coast last week talking about 911. He made numerous claims on the show that if true, would pose some serious problems for the official account of the 911 attacks. Some I had heard already like the near free fall speed and the building 7, but there was some new stuff to me. I assume they aren't actually "new" pieces of evidence, but I have never been that big into 911.

He was a good guest overall. Here are some of the points I found the most interesting:

1. The hijackers couldn't have been flying the planes because the type of maneuvers pulled off (high speed descents) are extremely difficult even for experienced pilots and would have been impossible for amateurs.

2. The planes could not have been normal airliners because their recorded speed is 200 mph faster than the maximum speeds that those planes can travel at low altitude.

3. There is no footage of any of the hijackers being at the airport. We have video footage of them the day before but in the airport where there is the most security we have no footage.

4. There was no reliable black box information from any of the planes. All 8 were either destroyed or released without serial numbres to prove their linkage to the planes. It is highly unlikely that these boxes would have been destroyed so it suggests someone altered them.

5. The only footage they ever released of the pentagon crash was photoshopped. He talked a bit about how he was able to tell that it was photoshopped but I never gave a technical explanation. This again suggests a cover up.

He also talked quite a lot about Larry Silverstein being at the dermatologist that morning and how the building were so full of asbestos that destroying the buildings would be the only way to save his investment because it would have cost so mouch to remove all the asbestos. This doesn't really prove any flaws with the official story, but is meant to suggest that multiple powerful interests had reason to destroy the towers.

His overall tone was that the official story was impossible and everyone can see this. Anyone with a double digit IQ can see that the official version is impossible so a new investigation is needed.

[The Big Dog]

Originally Posted by JLord

I was surprised that a forum search gave zero results for this person:

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

Wow, Massimo Mazzucco doesn't just sound like a nut, he spouts moronic theories that were debunked YEARS ago.

Thanks for the heads up about someone else to ignore!

[threadworm]

So his basic argument is this:

[ryanebelhar]

Originally Posted by JLord

I was surprised that a forum search gave zero results for this person:

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


He also talked quite a lot about Larry Silverstein being at the dermatologist that morning and how the building were so full of asbestos that destroying the buildings would be the only way to save his investment because it would have cost so mouch to remove all the asbestos.

This has always been one of my favorite theories about anything ever.

Peon: Mr. Silverstien, sir... We've discovered an alarming amount of asbestos in the World Trade Center. What should we do?

Silverstein: fly some planes into it, blame it on Al Qaeda.

Peon: But sir, wouldn't it be easier to...

Silverstein: PLANES! BUILDINGS! BIN LADEN! KABOOM!

Peon: ...

Silverstien: *cackles, eats Catholic baby heart*

[Spindrift]

Originally Posted by JLord

His overall tone was that the official story was impossible and everyone can see this. Anyone with a double digit IQ can see that the official version is impossible so a new investigation is needed.

That would be low double-digits.

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by JLord

1. The hijackers couldn't have been flying the planes because the type of maneuvers pulled off (high speed descents) are extremely difficult even for experienced pilots and would have been impossible for amateurs.

Wrong.

Quote:

2. The planes could not have been normal airliners because their recorded speed is 200 mph faster than the maximum speeds that those planes can travel at low altitude.

Wrong.

Quote:

3. There is no footage of any of the hijackers being at the airport. We have video footage of them the day before but in the airport where there is the most security we have no footage.

Wrong.

Quote:

4. There was no reliable black box information from any of the planes. All 8 were either destroyed or released without serial numbres to prove their linkage to the planes. It is highly unlikely that these boxes would have been destroyed so it suggests someone altered them.

Wrong and logic fail.

Quote:

5. The only footage they ever released of the pentagon crash was photoshopped. .

Wrong.

Quote:

He also talked quite a lot about Larry Silverstein being at the dermatologist that morning and how the building were so full of asbestos that destroying the buildings would be the only way to save his investment because it would have cost so mouch to remove all the asbestos.

Wrong.

Quote:

His overall tone was that the official story was impossible and everyone can see this. Anyone with a double digit IQ can see that the official version is impossible so a new investigation is needed.

This comment combined with your earlier disclaimers makes me go, hmmmmm....

[ElMondoHummus]

To be constructive: These have pretty much been covered. As one example: The first one can be found with various search terms as "hijackers" "skill" "flight school" "maneuvers", and the like. 911Myths has a page on the topic here:
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Fl...chool_Dropouts

... but there's way more discussion, albeit repetitive, in this forum. Bottom line: It's actually untrue, not only are the maneuvers well within their skill level, but some things they did - such as bounce all over the place altitude-wise, and the supposed go-around turn rather than performing a sideslip - are indicative of inexperienced pilots, not refutative.

You can find more on the other topics. IIRC, R.Mackey and Dwain Deets have had a back and forth on the maximum low level flight speed myth, and they're not the only ones who've had one. I don't see why the footage that does exist isn't good enough (and I had thought that one of the clips was of that very day, wasn't it?), plus that's far, far from the only evidence ID'ing them. The black boxes... well, so a forum search for that exact phrase and you'll be inundated with threads. And that last... well, there are so many ways to tackle it, really. For example, regardless of the merits of his image claims there's more proof than just the security camera images i.e. plane debris, victim remains, eyewitnesses, etc.... Also, since when does a still image editor like Photoshop work with video footage?... my point here is that claim has multiple flaws that can lead to multiple directions for refutations.

Anyway, do some forum searches, plus lean on the big 3 triad - Gravy's site for starters, 911Myths, and Debunking911 as well - and you'll pretty much have all you need. Even before leaning on the variety of sites that are out there and good (boloboffin's ae911truth.info site, Enrico Manieri's blog, etc.)

[BStrong]

Mazzucco much not get out much, nor read.

He went 5 for 5 in fail.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by JLord

I was surprised that a forum search gave zero results for this person:

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

He is an Italian filmmaker ....

He was a good guest overall. Here are some of the points I found the most interesting: .

You got to be joking? Interesting points? They are all lies and BS.

Originally Posted by JLord

1. The hijackers couldn't have been flying the planes because the type of maneuvers pulled off (high speed descents) are extremely difficult even for experienced pilots and would have been impossible for amateurs. .

An idiot Italian filmmaker. The maneuvers were simple less than qualified beginner pilot. A kid off the street could not only do the maneuvers, the kid could do them better. But then the FDR from 93 and 77 prove me right, and my experience flying kids in simulators and in flight. A big lie so stupid it makes Mazzucco and idiot on this topic.

Originally Posted by JLord

2. The planes could not have been normal airliners because their recorded speed is 200 mph faster than the maximum speeds that those planes can travel at low altitude. .

Wow, that is amazing, since we have on RADAR all four planes going faster than Vmo at low altitude, and they all crashed. Again the dumbest lies around, proved wrong by all pilots who have accidentally gone over the Vmo in a jet which can go over Vmo without falling apart. A fellow pilot went over Vmo, he damaged the skin as it peeled off under the wing... Debunked by video on 911, and science. Made up opinions by nuts in 911 truth.

Originally Posted by JLord

3. There is no footage of any of the hijackers being at the airport. We have video footage of them the day before but in the airport where there is the most security we have no footage. .

Wrong, there is footage on 911. Debunked, and a lie by the nut filmmaker.

BTW, anything on coast to coast is BS.

Originally Posted by JLord

4. There was no reliable black box information from any of the planes. All 8 were either destroyed or released without serial numbres to prove their linkage to the planes. It is highly unlikely that these boxes would have been destroyed so it suggests someone altered them. .

Wrong, 77 and 93 black boxes recovered and prove 1 and 2 are lies. Another idiotic lie based on stupidity.

Each FDR contained many hours of flight. Each flight on the FDR was a flight made by 77 and 93, from the exact airports 77 and 93 flew from. The previous flight match RADAR records, and you can download RADAR from 911 and the FDR for 77 and 93, and they match.

There should be laws for being that stupid and misleading the gullible.

Originally Posted by JLord

5. The only footage they ever released of the pentagon crash was photoshopped. He talked a bit about how he was able to tell that it was photoshopped but I never gave a technical explanation. This again suggests a cover up. .

Another lie, there are no cameras at the Pentagon aimed to get a plane at 483 knots hitting it.

He can't give a technical reason, he is spreading lies.

Originally Posted by JLord

He also talked quite a lot about Larry Silverstein being at the dermatologist that morning and how the building were so full of asbestos that destroying the buildings would be the only way to save his investment because it would have cost so much to remove all the asbestos. This doesn't really prove any flaws with the official story, but is meant to suggest that multiple powerful interests had reason to destroy the towers. .

Wow, there you go, more BS.

Originally Posted by JLord

His overall tone was that the official story was impossible and everyone can see this. Anyone with a double digit IQ can see that the official version is impossible so a new investigation is needed.

Seem a new investigation is wasted on idiots who appear on Coast to Coast, they only do BS.

[JLord]

Originally Posted by beachnut

BTW, anything on coast to coast is BS.

That would include people like Michio Kaku, Brian Greene, and Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Quote:

Wrong, 77 and 93 black boxes recovered

I should clarify that he said they were recovered but that the serial numbers or ID numbers or something like that were never revealed so we can't be sure if they are the real boxes.

[Reactor drone]

Originally Posted by JLord

I should clarify that he said they were recovered but that the serial numbers or ID numbers or something like that were never revealed so we can't be sure if they are the real boxes.

If they had released numbers you still wouldn't know they were the real boxes since the mythical conspirators would have that information and could just tell you anything. If they fooled the FBI and the NTSB, who were handling the black boxes, into believing they were the right boxes how could you know without even seeing them?

[cjnewson88]

Originally Posted by JLord

1. The hijackers couldn't have been flying the planes because the type of maneuvers pulled off (high speed descents) are extremely difficult even for experienced pilots and would have been impossible for amateurs.

This is an old one. It is incorrect. All lead hijackers had instrument rated commercial pilot licences. Most had experience in large jet simulators. Pilot Hani Hanjour, who hit the Pentagon, first got a licence in 1997, and had an endorsement to fly a Boeing 737.

But it's a false pretence from the start. There was nothing difficult about what these guys did. Take a plane already flying, and point it at a target.

Quote:

2. The planes could not have been normal airliners because their recorded speed is 200 mph faster than the maximum speeds that those planes can travel at low altitude.

False pretence. Just because you exceed an aircraft's max speed, does not mean it instantly disintegrates. See my blog, the hijackings of Federal Express flight, and the Boeing wing stress test around mid way down the page.

Quote:

3. There is no footage of any of the hijackers being at the airport. We have video footage of them the day before but in the airport where there is the most security we have no footage.

There is security footage of Muhammed Atta. There is also footage (linked on my blog also) of Hani Hanjour.

Quote:

4. There was no reliable black box information from any of the planes. All 8 were either destroyed or released without serial numbres to prove their linkage to the planes. It is highly unlikely that these boxes would have been destroyed so it suggests someone altered them.

Old one. False pretence. They think the black box is indestructible. In truth, they're not. Many black boxes have been destroyed by post crash fire alone. As it happens, AA77's FDR was recovered. UA93's entire black box was recovered. You only have to youtube them to see the NTSB reconstructions based on the black box data.

Quote:

5. The only footage they ever released of the pentagon crash was photoshopped. He talked a bit about how he was able to tell that it was photoshopped but I never gave a technical explanation. This again suggests a cover up.

Yeah, its funny how you look at how the Pentagon event has evolved. First it was "show us debris!", when that was provided, it was "show us bodies!", when that was provided, it was "show us video!". And when that was provided, everything was claimed to be "faked" or "photoshopped". Some people will never be pleased. You can see my blog above for the Pentagon event.

Quote:

He also talked quite a lot about Larry Silverstein being at the dermatologist that morning and how the building were so full of asbestos that destroying the buildings would be the only way to save his investment because it would have cost so mouch to remove all the asbestos. This doesn't really prove any flaws with the official story, but is meant to suggest that multiple powerful interests had reason to destroy the towers.

That too, is a very old one. Straight from "9/11 Mysteries", which is almost all total lies. See below;

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Hope that all helps

[The Big Dog]

Originally Posted by JLord

I should clarify that he said they were recovered but that the serial numbers or ID numbers or something like that were never revealed so we can't be sure if they are the real boxes.

Well, not only is that false, what they recovered had information regarding several flights that the plane had taken before the fatal flights.

Or perhaps you think that was faked... which begs the question: they faked the previous flights BUT NOT THE SERIAL NUMBERS??? Massino is lying.

I can imagine your reaction when you found out this guy was absolutely lying to you.

[JLord]

Originally Posted by 16.5

I can imagine your reaction when you found out this guy was absolutely lying to you.

I was absolutely shocked. Someone was giving misleading details about 911, and on Coast to Coast AM no less.

[Pinch]

Originally Posted by JLord

I should clarify that he said they were recovered but that the serial numbers or ID numbers or something like that were never revealed so we can't be sure if they are the real boxes.

Why do you think the FBI should reveal the serial numbers/ID nomenclature of those FDR/CVR devices to you? Or to anyone not involved with the investigation? Why are you so important that you need to know that data? Why are whack-job/fringe groups like Pilots for 9/11 "Truth" important enough to get that information when they can't even get basic aeronautical information correct?

[kookbreaker]

Is there some kind of freaking magic in Adobe Photoshop that makes 50% of the people who ever open the program suddenly think they are experts at image manipulation? Even if they never did anything with the program except play with the menu bars a bit?

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by JLord

That would include people like Michio Kaku, Brian Greene, and Neil deGrasse Tyson.



I should clarify that he said they were recovered but that the serial numbers or ID numbers or something like that were never revealed so we can't be sure if they are the real boxes.

, can Kaku debunk this? I hope so, why do I miss the science ones ...
, can Greene debunk this? I hope so
, can Tyson debunk this? I hope so.
Why did Coast to Coast let woo go unchecked (to keep me awake driving laughing at woo)? The serial number stuff, that is silly.

Coast to Coast is full of woo - I have missed all the rational guest. I listen late at night to stay up driving long hours, lol, Coost to Coast ...

The FDR shows the exact flight of 77 and 93, which matches RADAR data; Mazzucco is too lasy to check.

The FDRs have many flights recorded, matching 77 and 93 airframes' travels. The government gives out this stuff for all to check. It would be too easy to catch the "government" spreading lies on this subject, Mazzucco is too stupid to know.

Where are the serious claims? The maneuvers is one of the top dumb claims of all time. What maneuvers? Seriously, what maneuvers? 911 truth never defines the maneuver down to the numbers, pitch, bank, yaw, speed, VVI, etc. Just talk.


High speed descent? What?, the descent or the aircraft speed at descent? I could get the VVI to 15,000 feet per minutes, that is a fast descent done at 300 knots in a large jet, gear down, speed brakes up, engines idle, and up to 10 degrees of pitch down then less down pitch to maintain a safe speed. How does silly stuff like "high speed descent" fool people? There is no defined speed, VVI, or anything past talk, BS, nonsense = 911 truth.

[JLord]

Originally Posted by Pinch

Why do you think the FBI should reveal the serial numbers/ID nomenclature of those FDR/CVR devices to you?

I don't.

Are you implying that there is some reason for the FBI not to release this information?

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by JLord

I don't.

Are you implying that there is some reason for the FBI not to release this information?

Any number of reasons. One of which might be to avoid the legion of Photoshoping morons making fakes. Another might be, have they released this information in any other plane crash?

[Pinch]

Originally Posted by JLord

I don't.

Are you implying that there is some reason for the FBI not to release this information?

Are you an FBI agent? An FBI employee? Are you versed, well or otherwise, in the doings and comings and goings of FBI standard operating procedures for ongoing investigations? Particularly one this big?? Do you think for perhaps *just a second* that those SOPs would not conform to what your Truther mind thinks?

Personally, I'd like to think that the FBI would never give ANY information out to whack-job truthers who aren't so unbalanced that they cannot understand the difference between "We cant track $2.3 trillion in transactions" and "$2.3 trillion is missing!!!@@!!", the former being what was said and the latter being what Truthers hear.

Seriously. You tell ME why the FBI needs to release ANYTHING related to their 9/11 investigation. To anyone, much less 9/11 Whack Job Truthers like Pilots for 9/11 "Truth, led by "former Air Force Pilot" Cap't Bob Balsamo?

[triforcharity]

Originally Posted by JLord

I should clarify that he said they were recovered but that the serial numbers or ID numbers or something like that were never revealed so we can't be sure if they are the real boxes.

You mean the serial numbers on the plastic or aluminum label? https://commerce.honeywell.com/webap...tegoryId=53520 Interesting.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by JLord

I don't.

Are you implying that there is some reason for the FBI not to release this information?

Did you ask the FBI why you can't have evidence that could be admitted into evidence, used in trial. Did you ask, or research this subject? Is that a big No? Or what?

Guess what, I found in report Uncontrolled Descent and Collision With Terrain, United Airlines Flight 585, Boeing 737-200, N999UA, 4 Miles South of Colorado Springs Municipal Airport, Colorado Springs, Colorado, March 3, 1991; 8 serial numbers, even the FDR. Why? It is an NTSB report, and there are different rules in NTSB stuff, vs criminal stuff.

In aircraft accidents NTSB information ...

Quote:

No portion of a report of the Board, related to an accident or investigation of an accident, may be admitted into evidence or used in a civil action for damages

Thus in NTSB reports, where NTSB is responsible (aka the big accident, not a crime thing), we find Serial numbers.


In NTSB work done for the FBI, or police, you will not find serial numbers, because they numbers are not required by the NTSB to be released, they are part of a criminal investigation. We now have to dig in and get into legal issues; have you done that? 911 truth can't, and will not do anything but make up fantasy, as you have posted, they make it up, and it is dumber than dirt claims, no sources, no back up evidence and facts.




911 was a crime. Do they release serial numbers of weapons used in crimes?

Quote:

In cases of suspected criminal activity, other agencies may participate in the investigation. The Safety Board does not investigate criminal activity; in the past, once it has been established that a transportation tragedy is, in fact, a criminal act, the FBI becomes the lead federal investigative body, with the NTSB providing any requested support.

NTSB accident reports have different rules for release to the public, vs the FBI. What are FBI rules for trial, etc?

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by beachnut

911 was a crime. Do they release serial numbers of weapons used in crimes?

That is the weird part. Imagine a gun recovered as evidence during a homicide investigation. Some random person off the street demands the serial number off the murder weapon. Not a lawyer for a party involved, not law enforcement, not a family member, just a random person.

What are the odds you are going to give them that information?

[Pinch]

Originally Posted by Robrob

That is the weird part. Imagine a gun recovered as evidence during a homicide investigation. Some random person off the street demands the serial number off the murder weapon. Not a lawyer for a party involved, not law enforcement, not a family member, just a random person.

What are the odds you are going to give them that information?

But but but...if it was some pilot who *demands* the serial number while at the same time saying "Its a fake gun...it can't fire under those circumstances. You planted it." of course you would...lickity-split. First thing, Boss...I'll get those numbers to you right away!