Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

Forum rules

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
BBCode is OFF
Smilies are OFF
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by JeremyTheJew » Sun Apr 28, 2019 7:22 pm

:x
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Sun Apr 28, 2019 6:54 pm
TommyGambino wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:49 pm
gohnjotti wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:05 pm Does anyone prominent in the family have any connection to Gene or Carneglia? Cefalu, Cali, Mannino?
Mikey Paradiso, maybe Vinny Artuso now he's out. Two capo's. None of the major names you mentioned were even made when Gene and John went away so I'd doubt they are tight with the leadership.
Fuck.

Props Tommy. 👌
none to me for finding that!?!

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by SonnyBlackstein » Sun Apr 28, 2019 6:54 pm

TommyGambino wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:49 pm
gohnjotti wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:05 pm Does anyone prominent in the family have any connection to Gene or Carneglia? Cefalu, Cali, Mannino?
Mikey Paradiso, maybe Vinny Artuso now he's out. Two capo's. None of the major names you mentioned were even made when Gene and John went away so I'd doubt they are tight with the leadership.
Fuck.

Props Tommy. 👌

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by JeremyTheJew » Sun Apr 28, 2019 4:30 pm

TommyGambino wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:49 pm
gohnjotti wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:05 pm Does anyone prominent in the family have any connection to Gene or Carneglia? Cefalu, Cali, Mannino?
Mikey Paradiso, maybe Vinny Artuso now he's out. Two capo's. None of the major names you mentioned were even made when Gene and John went away so I'd doubt they are tight with the leadership.

you called that one.

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by UTC » Mon Jul 30, 2018 6:33 pm

SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:21 pm Anyone know what John Carniglia’s favourite colour is?





I do man crush you snakes :mrgreen:
Gene Gotti and John Carneglia would have you killed for that. On topic (I'm done)

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by SonnyBlackstein » Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:21 pm

Anyone know what John Carniglia’s favourite colour is?





I do man crush you snakes :mrgreen:

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by DPG » Sat Jul 28, 2018 4:53 pm

:o Shut it down :lol:

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by willychichi » Sat Jul 28, 2018 11:23 am

Great avatar Snakes.

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by Snakes » Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:51 am

Nobody is going to "lose it" because this ends here. Next post that isn't about Gene, Carneglia, or a related subject is going to be the cause of this thread being shut down. Don't be that guy. There is a whole entire folder for posters to bitch at each other in. Do it there.

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by JIGGS » Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

UTC wrote: ↑Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:54 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Thu Jul 26, 2018 8:43 pm
UTC wrote: ↑Thu Jul 26, 2018 3:16 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:33 pm
JIGGS wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:41 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:22 pm It’s just your opinion yet I should ‘trust you, you know.’

Okie dokie.
Don't switch it around Sally. I was referring to the diapers angle and you know it.

JIGGS
Yeah. Nope.

In post A you’re mister definitive who we should ‘trust you, you know.’ then post B you’re just throwing round an opinion.

Personally I respect all legitimate, reasoned, logical opinions, so no beef there, it’s when definitives are tossed around about speculative issues that the eyes roll.

You can have all the opinions on gene and John you want. More power to you. But when you ‘know’, well that’s when you’re a little lost.
Jiggs' post A and B were in no way inconsistent because they were about two different topics. Post A was about whether anyone is going to hand him a bunch of envelopes. Post B was whether he is going to create a lot of waves as to the power structure. One can feel more definite about topic A than he does about topic B. It also so happens that Jiggs is very knowledgeable.
"Trust me" is just a figure of speech anyway. No one is actually asking for your trust.
He may be very knowledgeable.

But when he starts throwing around definitives about which no one can be, definitive, then people, like, say for example, myself, get ‘the ‘ump’.

People who ‘know’, when you can’t ‘know’, sort of thing.

We informed slimshady of the problem with definitives. If a 19yr old can pick it up, I have faith in jiggs.

Edit: and he’s the new boy here, so weight throwing doesn’t do brilliantly in that context either.

Rant done.
Not at all new in the continuum of the forums. Venerable sage.
Hey buddy,

Pay "Chris Rosenberg" no mind. He thinks he's in charge here. He's making a non-issue. He's the nut with the sign that says "Repent. The End is Near."

Thanks for the kind word Under The Clock. You know what time it is. (Watch him 'lose it' for my comment being too definitive.)

JIGGS

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by JIGGS » Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:22 am

SILENT PARTNERZ wrote: ↑Fri Jul 27, 2018 10:02 am JIGGS has been on edge lately.
I am worried about him.
Hey pal, your concern is appreciated but as the scholar Mike Tyson would say "unnecessarily ludicrous."

You want to know what it is? I'll tell ya what it is. Jewboy over there isn't hip. Here's the reason for his silly ire:

The JIGGS wrote:

"You really think Marino, Jo Jo, Lenny D., much less any zips, feel obligated to "reward" anyone for doing a quarter nickel in the can? Did Sonny F. get a mountain of envelopes for being in the guinness world record books? He gets a box of diapers from the VA once a month. Trust me I know. "

That last part. What's in italics and in bold. That's what this hallway monitor is worked up over. How I can be so sure Sonny Franzese receives diapers from Veterans administrations. Cocksucker I don't know for a fact. It's a fuckin' joke tied to a reality. As a vet myself I get that same perk. What? You think he thought "Trust me I know" was in reference to Sonny or anyone else automatically getting an envelope after coming home? Probably. But is it really that big of a deal? He's actually making an argument over it with Under The Clock. Give me a break.

I'm not on edge pal. I wipe my diapers with Santino Cohen's opinion. Tell him to go play shit house lawyer in the sand box (gangsterBb) with the other neutered puppies. Nobody cares about his outrage over here.

I'll see ya pal,

JIGGS

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by UTC » Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:54 pm

SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Thu Jul 26, 2018 8:43 pm
UTC wrote: ↑Thu Jul 26, 2018 3:16 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:33 pm
JIGGS wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:41 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:22 pm It’s just your opinion yet I should ‘trust you, you know.’

Okie dokie.
Don't switch it around Sally. I was referring to the diapers angle and you know it.

JIGGS
Yeah. Nope.

In post A you’re mister definitive who we should ‘trust you, you know.’ then post B you’re just throwing round an opinion.

Personally I respect all legitimate, reasoned, logical opinions, so no beef there, it’s when definitives are tossed around about speculative issues that the eyes roll.

You can have all the opinions on gene and John you want. More power to you. But when you ‘know’, well that’s when you’re a little lost.
Jiggs' post A and B were in no way inconsistent because they were about two different topics. Post A was about whether anyone is going to hand him a bunch of envelopes. Post B was whether he is going to create a lot of waves as to the power structure. One can feel more definite about topic A than he does about topic B. It also so happens that Jiggs is very knowledgeable.
"Trust me" is just a figure of speech anyway. No one is actually asking for your trust.
He may be very knowledgeable.

But when he starts throwing around definitives about which no one can be, definitive, then people, like, say for example, myself, get ‘the ‘ump’.

People who ‘know’, when you can’t ‘know’, sort of thing.

We informed slimshady of the problem with definitives. If a 19yr old can pick it up, I have faith in jiggs.

Edit: and he’s the new boy here, so weight throwing doesn’t do brilliantly in that context either.

Rant done.
Not at all new in the continuum of the forums. Venerable sage.

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by SILENT PARTNERZ » Fri Jul 27, 2018 10:02 am

JIGGS has been on edge lately.
I am worried about him.

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by SonnyBlackstein » Thu Jul 26, 2018 8:43 pm

UTC wrote: ↑Thu Jul 26, 2018 3:16 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:33 pm
JIGGS wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:41 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:22 pm It’s just your opinion yet I should ‘trust you, you know.’

Okie dokie.
Don't switch it around Sally. I was referring to the diapers angle and you know it.

JIGGS
Yeah. Nope.

In post A you’re mister definitive who we should ‘trust you, you know.’ then post B you’re just throwing round an opinion.

Personally I respect all legitimate, reasoned, logical opinions, so no beef there, it’s when definitives are tossed around about speculative issues that the eyes roll.

You can have all the opinions on gene and John you want. More power to you. But when you ‘know’, well that’s when you’re a little lost.
Jiggs' post A and B were in no way inconsistent because they were about two different topics. Post A was about whether anyone is going to hand him a bunch of envelopes. Post B was whether he is going to create a lot of waves as to the power structure. One can feel more definite about topic A than he does about topic B. It also so happens that Jiggs is very knowledgeable.
"Trust me" is just a figure of speech anyway. No one is actually asking for your trust.
He may be very knowledgeable.

But when he starts throwing around definitives about which no one can be, definitive, then people, like, say for example, myself, get ‘the ‘ump’.

People who ‘know’, when you can’t ‘know’, sort of thing.

We informed slimshady of the problem with definitives. If a 19yr old can pick it up, I have faith in jiggs.

Edit: and he’s the new boy here, so weight throwing doesn’t do brilliantly in that context either.

Rant done.

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by SonnyBlackstein » Thu Jul 26, 2018 8:39 pm

JIGGS wrote: ↑Thu Jul 26, 2018 2:40 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:19 pm Being clever and being smart are not the same thing.

But you’re smart enough to know that. Aren’t you.
Smart enough to know you're "D." None of the Above.

And don't forget to put a question mark at the end of every question.

Bye,

JIGGS
1. Aw, don’t throw stones Jiggsey.

2. Maybe it wasn’t a question.

Re: Gene Gotti, John Carneglia

by UTC » Thu Jul 26, 2018 3:16 pm

SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:33 pm
JIGGS wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:41 pm
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:22 pm It’s just your opinion yet I should ‘trust you, you know.’

Okie dokie.
Don't switch it around Sally. I was referring to the diapers angle and you know it.

JIGGS
Yeah. Nope.

In post A you’re mister definitive who we should ‘trust you, you know.’ then post B you’re just throwing round an opinion.

Personally I respect all legitimate, reasoned, logical opinions, so no beef there, it’s when definitives are tossed around about speculative issues that the eyes roll.

You can have all the opinions on gene and John you want. More power to you. But when you ‘know’, well that’s when you’re a little lost.
Jiggs' post A and B were in no way inconsistent because they were about two different topics. Post A was about whether anyone is going to hand him a bunch of envelopes. Post B was whether he is going to create a lot of waves as to the power structure. One can feel more definite about topic A than he does about topic B. It also so happens that Jiggs is very knowledgeable.
"Trust me" is just a figure of speech anyway. No one is actually asking for your trust.

Top