by Chucky » Sat Apr 02, 2016 11:39 am
SonnyBlackstein wrote:I think the term 'sickness' is a little overrated Mr Wiseguy.
These things aren't set in stone. There's no official press release.
And as the idea is be be secretive and deceptive, in certain cases there can be cause for speculation.
Crea v Amuso etc.
Now in this case (Bonanno's), personally I think now the evidence is overwhelming that Mancuso is official, but Tommy has presented his rationale to dispute this. Whilst I don't agree with his perspective I understand his argument and calling it a 'sickness' I think is overkill which stifles meaningful dialogue.
If someone says 'I know Mancuso's not boss'. And doesn't offer any basis for this, then sure, fuck 'em. But for someone to say 'In my opinion Mancuso is not official because of X,Y,Z..." to be called 'sick' is unfair.
Tommy presented his argument with evidence and logic.
Agree with him or don't. Leave it at that
I usually don't debate NY shit, but ever since Montreal turned into the wild west I've kept an eye on the Bonannos, and I'm not trying to say I'm expert or in the know in anyway.
The feds, Capeci, the NY Post, and Aiello himself have identified Mancuso as the boss, I think that's pretty overwhelming. And to Tommy's point about Palazzolo and Aiello being off the street hurting him...that suggests that Mancuso only has a handful of guys who are aligned to him when there hasn't been any evidence showing that outside of a "hunch".
In the Asaro detention memo it was mentioned by Vincent Asaro that he and Tommy DiFiore were discussing taking down a bunch of capos, and I think the Cammarano christmas party all but confirms this did happen. Now, are we suppose to believe that Mancuso had no say in this or that none of these new capos are aligned with him? I think that's a broad leap to make.
All we know is that there is a faction backing Cammarano to be the boss, we don't know if it's a majority of the family or not, just that there is one.
[quote="SonnyBlackstein"]I think the term 'sickness' is a little overrated Mr Wiseguy.
These things aren't set in stone. There's no official press release.
And as the idea is be be secretive and deceptive, in certain cases there can be cause for speculation.
Crea v Amuso etc.
Now in this case (Bonanno's), personally I think now the evidence is overwhelming that Mancuso is official, but Tommy has presented his rationale to dispute this. Whilst I don't agree with his perspective I understand his argument and calling it a 'sickness' I think is overkill which stifles meaningful dialogue.
If someone says 'I know Mancuso's not boss'. And doesn't offer any basis for this, then sure, fuck 'em. But for someone to say 'In my opinion Mancuso is not official because of X,Y,Z..." to be called 'sick' is unfair.
Tommy presented his argument with evidence and logic.
Agree with him or don't. Leave it at that[/quote]
I usually don't debate NY shit, but ever since Montreal turned into the wild west I've kept an eye on the Bonannos, and I'm not trying to say I'm expert or in the know in anyway.
The feds, Capeci, the NY Post, and Aiello himself have identified Mancuso as the boss, I think that's pretty overwhelming. And to Tommy's point about Palazzolo and Aiello being off the street hurting him...that suggests that Mancuso only has a handful of guys who are aligned to him when there hasn't been any evidence showing that outside of a "hunch".
In the Asaro detention memo it was mentioned by Vincent Asaro that he and Tommy DiFiore were discussing taking down a bunch of capos, and I think the Cammarano christmas party all but confirms this did happen. Now, are we suppose to believe that Mancuso had no say in this or that none of these new capos are aligned with him? I think that's a broad leap to make.
All we know is that there is a faction backing Cammarano to be the boss, we don't know if it's a majority of the family or not, just that there is one.