This Thing Of Ours
Skip to content
by Don Mosseria » Sat Dec 31, 2022 8:31 am
by OcSleeper » Sat Dec 31, 2022 8:29 am
by BeatiPaoli » Sat Dec 31, 2022 8:24 am
by Don Mosseria » Fri Dec 30, 2022 12:38 pm
TSNYC wrote: ↑Fri Dec 30, 2022 12:16 pm Apologies! I’m an idiot ..
by TSNYC » Fri Dec 30, 2022 12:16 pm
by TSNYC » Fri Dec 30, 2022 12:11 pm
by Don Mosseria » Fri Dec 30, 2022 8:32 am
Angelo Santino wrote: ↑Thu May 21, 2020 5:12 pm B. wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 2:33 am The Commission had formal meetings every five years beginning in 1931, where they would also re-elect Commission members or add/remove members. Joe Bonanno discussed this in his book and so did his cousin Magaddino on his office bug, along with other sources. They appear to have had smaller meetings to solve specific issues in the interim between the scheduled meetings. If there were rumored Commission meetings in between the planned five year meetings, we could try to see if there were important events going on in the mafia during those specific times. I interpreted these 5 year annual meets as a continuation of the General Assembly- national meeting of bosses and underlings. We know the Commission met infrequently but was composed of 5-7 bosses, hence not the G.A. To me, Appalachin is the last GA meeting in the US.
B. wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 2:33 am The Commission had formal meetings every five years beginning in 1931, where they would also re-elect Commission members or add/remove members. Joe Bonanno discussed this in his book and so did his cousin Magaddino on his office bug, along with other sources. They appear to have had smaller meetings to solve specific issues in the interim between the scheduled meetings. If there were rumored Commission meetings in between the planned five year meetings, we could try to see if there were important events going on in the mafia during those specific times.
Angelo Santino wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 6:50 am B. wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 11:11 pm Chris Christie wrote: ↑Thu May 21, 2020 5:12 pm I interpreted these 5 year annual meets as a continuation of the General Assembly- national meeting of bosses and underlings. We know the Commission met infrequently but was composed of 5-7 bosses, hence not the G.A. To me, Appalachin is the last GA meeting in the US. I don't think the 5 year meetings were General Assembly, as the 5 year meetings were Commission-centric and one was held in 1956, while Apalachin was a year later. I would definitely agree Apalachin appears to be a General Assembly and was the last. I am under the impression the General Assemblies were called for specific reasons and not regularly scheduled but can't say for sure. Well before the Commission it could be argued that the GA were Boss of Bosses centric. Both were mass meetings of leaders from across the country who didn't sit on any formal ruling body who were ultimately looking to the higher power- be it boss of bosses or the commission- for leadership. Had a commission not been formed and it went to Luciano or Mangano they likely could have imposed something similar. But one of the functions of these 5 year meetings was to reconfirm the commission. It's likely that the reasons for these meetings changed.
B. wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 11:11 pm Chris Christie wrote: ↑Thu May 21, 2020 5:12 pm I interpreted these 5 year annual meets as a continuation of the General Assembly- national meeting of bosses and underlings. We know the Commission met infrequently but was composed of 5-7 bosses, hence not the G.A. To me, Appalachin is the last GA meeting in the US. I don't think the 5 year meetings were General Assembly, as the 5 year meetings were Commission-centric and one was held in 1956, while Apalachin was a year later. I would definitely agree Apalachin appears to be a General Assembly and was the last. I am under the impression the General Assemblies were called for specific reasons and not regularly scheduled but can't say for sure.
Chris Christie wrote: ↑Thu May 21, 2020 5:12 pm I interpreted these 5 year annual meets as a continuation of the General Assembly- national meeting of bosses and underlings. We know the Commission met infrequently but was composed of 5-7 bosses, hence not the G.A. To me, Appalachin is the last GA meeting in the US.
Don Mosseria wrote: ↑Fri Dec 30, 2022 7:14 am Mafia Constitutional Bodies & their Powers, Before & After 1931: National Convention & Commission v. Assemblea Generale, Gran Consiglio & Capo dei Capi Conclusion Based on both the general usage of the political/governmental terminology of the pre-Commission institutions, as well as an analysis of the descriptions by Joe Bonanno of the constitutional bodies of the mafia both pre and post the formation of the Commission, and some unsourced general knowledge, it seems very likely that: A) the General Assembly and the National Convention are very similar institutions. It is possible that the latter is simply the continuation of the former, though it is also possible that there were differences between the pre and post Commission forms. These bodies may have held representative and legislative power, as well as important social and political functions; B) the formation of the Commission likely amounts to a continuation of executive and judicial functions that may have previously been held by and somehow dispersed between the Capo dei Capi and the Gran Consiglio. Based on more general norms, it is possible that ultimate executive (and judicial) authority had sat with the Capo dei Capi, who was advised and assisted in these roles by the Council. It is also possible, however, that the Council provided some check on the unrestrained authority of the Capo dei Capi, and perhaps united could veto or remove him; C) after the expiration in 1961 of the mandate of the final uninterrupted National Convention of 1956, it seems likely that the quasi-democratic representative mandate of the American mafia simply terminated, and the legislative authority of the General Assembly/National Convention passed to the Commission. If this is so, it would be a hugely significant revolution in the constitutional framework of Cosa Nostra.
by B. » Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:00 pm
Chris Christie wrote: ↑Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:52 pm I think the argument could be made that the "government" of the mob was the significant change in 1931. The system of Boss of bosses, a grand council and general assembly was in place up until that point. We don't know how frequently they met or what the ramifications were of this grand council. It could have been "senior" bosses or it could have been the BOB's councilmen or it could have been occupied by consiglieri. I suspect the Council was smaller than the Assembly but I have nothing to base that on.
It's interesting how these patterns keep resurfacing at different times in history. Like Genoveses, it was founded by Corleonese but has been a mainland-oriented group since the 1920's and yet here are- 100 years later we got Corleonese Bellomo as boss. It's not a conspiracy but it shows bloodlines and tradition even if they themselves don't know it. (For all we know, he may not even know he's related to Majuri.)
by Angelo Santino » Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:52 pm
2 + 4 + 6 - Yep, in addition to confirming Gentile's pre-1931 terminology and account of the mafia's national structure, the Morello letters are a slam dunk that completely destroys the idea that these were loosely affiliated "Italian gangs" who were organized in 1931 or even in the 1920s. Not that most of us still believed that, but we have the highest-ranking member of the US mafia, Morello, discussing the mafia in highly-nuanced terms in the first decade of the 1900s that show how consistent the organization has been since its arrival to the US up until present day. Like we talked about earlier in this thread, the Appalachin-style meetings may well have been a continuation of the National Assembly and it's clear that the post-1931 Commission, with its voting system and select membership, was more a development of earlier systems than a "sudden" change in operation.
7 - Very good question. We know one of the functions of the consiglio / council within individual families was to decide the fate of members who had been in trouble. This is discussed by one of the San Jose informants (who give an account of one of these council meetings where they decided the fate of Peter Misuraca), Stefano LaTorre's son (who describes the "court" held to decide his father's fate), and depending on how you interpret some of what Gentile said, a consiglio was also held to handle a conflict in Pittsburgh. The individual family consiglio also had other functions (approving Gentile's transfer to SF and we know the St. Louis and Milwaukee councils would discuss "policy" with the boss), but one of the major functions was to decide whether or not a member should be killed, shelved, or given a pass. ^ The Grand Consiglio probably served in a similar capacity, but when it came to situations that affected the mafia nationally. If my interpretation of that letter is right, Constantino was a made member from another city who came to Chicago and upset the local leadership. That is a national issue, as it affected more than one family. Now, we don't know exactly how DiSpenza fits into the Grand Consiglio vs. the National Assembly, or how those two bodies would be involved, but we do know DiSpenza, who was at the very least a leading Chicago figure and probably the boss, overstepped his bounds in relation to these ruling bodies and Morello had to correct him. Given how minimal Morello's explanation is (he is basically just telling DiSpenza he made a mistake), we can assume DiSpenza was already familiar with the Grand Consiglio and National Assemblies given that Morello didn't walk him through the entire process and only clarified where DiSpenza erred.
8 - Along with Calderone saying the oldest member of the family presided over ceremonies in Catania, Nino Giuffre's 1980s ceremony in Caccamo was presided over by an elderly member who is not known to have held a rank, which lends itself to Calderone's comment. Not directly related, but Nick Stefanelli said at his 2000s initiation ceremony that the proposed members were inducted in order of their age, though he didn't indicate if it was oldest to youngest or vice versa. We know that age is not nearly as important in traditional mafia protocol as it's made out to be in pop culture, so these examples of age factoring into protocol stand out.
^ Bosses often did not officiate nor even attend induction ceremonies spanning generations and different families, though not sure about the early years. A reliable Gambino CW said that inductions must be officiated by two captains at the minimum, though we have examples as early as the 1950s of a single captain officiating a ceremony. We know the Springfield Genovese member who became a CW was inducted by two Genovese captains. Joey Merlino inducting members as a soldier is a major exception, so that's an outlier we can throw away. If the "two captain" rule goes back to the beginning of the mafia, that could tell us something about the reference to both Vito Cascio Ferro and his close associate Pasquale Enea. Maybe they were "two captains" (of which family, I won't guess) who inducted a member which would explain why Morello or Lupo was out of the loop (or "out of the Lupo"... terrible).
^ Joe Bonanno was def removed from the membership and doesn't seem to have presided over nor officiated most known ceremonies. However, a Bonanno CI (Frank "Fauney" D'Angelo") says his induction ceremony was presided over by Joe Bonanno. All of the identified attendees of this ceremony, including D'Angelo, his sponsor (unknown, but said to be from D'Angelo's Sicilian hometown), the host (Natale Evola), and Joe Bonanno were Castellammarese, so it's possible Joe Bonanno made an exception for a Castellammarese-centric induction. We know he favored his own. ^ And just a last side note, but Angelo Bruno was proposed for membership by Mike Maggio but offhand I believe most if not all accounts of Philly inductions were officiated by administration members if not the boss. Underboss Marco Reginelli inducted Rocco Scafidi. There is reason to speculate (but no way to presently confirm) that Michael Maggio may have been an earlier administration member, but whether that was at Bruno's time of induction (early 1950s), or ever, who knows.
by thekiduknow » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:32 pm
B. wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:25 pm ^ Joe Bonanno was def removed from the membership and doesn't seem to have presided over nor officiated most known ceremonies. However, a Bonanno CI (Frank "Fauney" D'Angelo") says his induction ceremony was presided over by Joe Bonanno. All of the identified attendees of this ceremony, including D'Angelo, his sponsor (unknown, but said to be from D'Angelo's Sicilian hometown), the host (Natale Evola), and Joe Bonanno were Castellammarese, so it's possible Joe Bonanno made an exception for a Castellammarese-centric induction. We know he favored his own.
by B. » Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:25 pm
Chris Christie wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:56 pm 1 I think Schiro was pure Roccamenese but married a woman from Camporeale. Maybe I'm mistaken and you're correct. His grandfather was the former mayor of Roccamena in the 1840's I think. 2 The general takeaway is that the more things change the more they stay the same. Listening to the formal process of how membership and organizational issues were resolved in the snapshot we have of 1908 seems very congruent with the type of decisions the commission would have made in the 1960's: like ruling that a Family which makes a member is responsible for said member, or granting a Boss the authority and support to restructure a Family. 4 The duties the 1931 Commission became responsible for were inherited from bureaucratic predecessors. Similar to the SS becoming assigned to presidential protection and losing its national scope, only to be picked up by the FBN who lost out to the FBI. The government's always had a system in place to address interstate and federal crime. Whereas the mafia always had their system in place. Although it seems to have been watered down with each rendition, a form of simplification for scrutiny sake. 5 I think between 1900 and 1930, more communication was conducted early on through letters and as travel became more accessible, convenient and affordable more meetings were conducted. We do know that in 1904 Morello went to NOLA wearing a red bandanna around his neck which seemed to carry some symbolism to it. 6 Can anyone read those letters and still believe a "new organization" was created in 1931? 7 I guess we should ask ourselves- why did Morello explain the gran consiglio in light of the Constantino situation to Dispenza? Granted if wikipedia is correct Dispenza became boss during this same year, but it seems like Morello is chastising him for overstepping boundaries rather than explaining protocol to new boss. Could he have been washing his hands of it by laying claim to his being on the consiglio and thus unable to take part in the assemblea? Any other ideas/speculations? 8 Was it always a rule that a boss had to do the ceremonies? Caldarone in Sicily made no such claim and in fact stated it was to be conducted by the oldest man of honest who could attend. I do believe there was a tightening up, but if I recall correctly, Blood and Honor states that Bruno was initiated by Maggio, was that incorrect? I guess the conclusion we'll both reach is if the boss gives the OK and can't do it himself, he can designate for it to still be conducted by someone else.
by Villain » Fri Jun 05, 2020 12:15 pm
Chris Christie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:56 am thekiduknow wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 9:15 pm Chris Christie wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:56 pm 8 Was it always a rule that a boss had to do the ceremonies? Caldarone in Sicily made no such claim and in fact stated it was to be conducted by the oldest man of honest who could attend. I do believe there was a tightening up, but if I recall correctly, Blood and Honor states that Bruno was initiated by Maggio, was that incorrect? I guess the conclusion we'll both reach is if the boss gives the OK and can't do it himself, he can designate for it to still be conducted by someone else. In "Man of Honor", Bonanno says that there were members of his Family that he never met. I always took that to mean that he would occasianlly have others induct members on his behalf. Yes he did say that. ------------- Going through Bill's Last Testament and oy... the history is atrocious. He must have had recordings of his father and combined it with stuff he found online. (I think alot of 'people' use the internet as a resource, even guys in who were involved but of course would never admit to it.) One thing that always struck me as odd about Nick Gentile was his claim that Ricca pulled him aside and asked him about the Masseria-Maranzano feud and said "We of Chicago takes the matters of New York serious and we have planes to deploy if needed." Like WTF? The Outfit has their own air force too? Similar story is told in Bill's book: "One of the capos bragged that his son was an airplane pilot and offered Maranzano the use of an airplane for the meeting. Maranzano accepted brazenly, saying, "Yes, have your son fly around over the meeting with a bomb. If somebody don't follow my order, everybody will be bombed!" Claims this happened in 1931. Regarding the Commission, Bill makes it out to be like a semi-making ceremony, tying hands in a circle etc, symbolic stuff. He doesn't go into the Commission and its inner-functions. At least not in a way that I can draw parallels to Morello's letters. Maybe B. can spot things I'm not seeing, do you have the book?
thekiduknow wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 9:15 pm Chris Christie wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:56 pm 8 Was it always a rule that a boss had to do the ceremonies? Caldarone in Sicily made no such claim and in fact stated it was to be conducted by the oldest man of honest who could attend. I do believe there was a tightening up, but if I recall correctly, Blood and Honor states that Bruno was initiated by Maggio, was that incorrect? I guess the conclusion we'll both reach is if the boss gives the OK and can't do it himself, he can designate for it to still be conducted by someone else. In "Man of Honor", Bonanno says that there were members of his Family that he never met. I always took that to mean that he would occasianlly have others induct members on his behalf.
Chris Christie wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:56 pm 8 Was it always a rule that a boss had to do the ceremonies? Caldarone in Sicily made no such claim and in fact stated it was to be conducted by the oldest man of honest who could attend. I do believe there was a tightening up, but if I recall correctly, Blood and Honor states that Bruno was initiated by Maggio, was that incorrect? I guess the conclusion we'll both reach is if the boss gives the OK and can't do it himself, he can designate for it to still be conducted by someone else.
by Angelo Santino » Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:55 am
Pogo The Clown wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:51 am Chris Christie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:36 am Pogo The Clown wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:04 am Chris Christie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:56 am Similar story is told in Bill's book: "One of the capos bragged that his son was an airplane pilot and offered Maranzano the use of an airplane for the meeting. Maranzano accepted brazenly, saying, "Yes, have your son fly around over the meeting with a bomb. If somebody don't follow my order, everybody will be bombed!" Claims this happened in 1931. My mind can be playing tricks on me but didn't Valachi or Bonanno also mention Maranzano having a pilot flying around the meeting site? Pogo If so I don't remember that. I checked and it was Bonsnno. Page 125 of the softcover version. It was during the big national meeting after Masseria is killed. After everyone at the meeting heard a plane flying overhead he quotes Maranzano as saying that a plane is circling the building armed with machine guns and bombs. Bonanno described the pilot as the son of a member of the family who was hired by Maranzano. Bonanno said the plane was on the lookout for any approaching police vehicles but that those in attendance didn't know that and thought that it might be used agsinst them. Pogo
Chris Christie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:36 am Pogo The Clown wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:04 am Chris Christie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:56 am Similar story is told in Bill's book: "One of the capos bragged that his son was an airplane pilot and offered Maranzano the use of an airplane for the meeting. Maranzano accepted brazenly, saying, "Yes, have your son fly around over the meeting with a bomb. If somebody don't follow my order, everybody will be bombed!" Claims this happened in 1931. My mind can be playing tricks on me but didn't Valachi or Bonanno also mention Maranzano having a pilot flying around the meeting site? Pogo If so I don't remember that.
Pogo The Clown wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:04 am Chris Christie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:56 am Similar story is told in Bill's book: "One of the capos bragged that his son was an airplane pilot and offered Maranzano the use of an airplane for the meeting. Maranzano accepted brazenly, saying, "Yes, have your son fly around over the meeting with a bomb. If somebody don't follow my order, everybody will be bombed!" Claims this happened in 1931. My mind can be playing tricks on me but didn't Valachi or Bonanno also mention Maranzano having a pilot flying around the meeting site? Pogo
Chris Christie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:56 am Similar story is told in Bill's book: "One of the capos bragged that his son was an airplane pilot and offered Maranzano the use of an airplane for the meeting. Maranzano accepted brazenly, saying, "Yes, have your son fly around over the meeting with a bomb. If somebody don't follow my order, everybody will be bombed!" Claims this happened in 1931.
by Pogo The Clown » Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:51 am
by Angelo Santino » Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:36 am
Top