Buffalo/Ontario Mob Acitivity

[Newyorkempire]

Burnstein here (not Bernstein);

What was reported in 2006 or 2010 about Detroit LCN that wasn't accurate?

Those numbers were not inflated. There were 40-45 made guys alive. Now, there is probably 20-25, due to a lot of OGs dying. Jack Tocco made a bunch of people in the 2000s.

I've interviewed the underboss (Tony Z), two consiglieres (Dom Bomb, Tony Pal), a capo (Frankie Bomb) and two soldiers (Nove Tocco & Paul Corrado).

I've interviewed nearly every FBI agent and US Atty that has worked OC in Detroit dating back to the 1960s into 2022.

But let's take it from Wiseguy. Burnstein is a lying, manipulative hack who knows nothing of what he reports and is a spreader of fake news.

SMB

Well, let's look at it...again.

The feds had the family at 23 members in 1984. 26 members in 1985. 26 members in 1990. 28 members in 1993. And 29 members in 1996 at the time of the GamTax bust. In short, a range of 23-29 members from the mid-1980's to the mid-1990's. In your own 2006 book, you said 25 members. Hell, just for the fun of it, let's go with an even 30 members - a number I saw a few times here and there.

Over the past 30 years, I count 28 members who have died. There's been no evidence, outside rumors you alone have reported, that anyone has been made in Detroit in years. Let alone in large numbers. Let alone anywhere near enough to not only replace all the known members who have died, but also make enough to have 40-45 members 10-15 years ago or 20-25 members now. Sorry the math doesn't add up.

Furthermore, look at the other Midwest families. Cleveland, Milwaukee and St. Louis all have a single known member living. Kansas City has maybe half a dozen. Even Chicago has perhaps only 15 or so. But Detroit, who hasn't really had anything approaching a significant case since 2006, is the largest with 20-25 members? I don't think so. I'd bet my left nut they're in single digits.

Don't take it from me. As with Buffalo, look at the math. Look at the relative lack of cases over decades now. There's no getting past that, regardless of what anyone says.

What's wrong with this picture? Something seems...off.

Capture.PNG

Highly doubtful Chicago only has 15 guys left. Dont care what the FBI has on file from years past. Not buying it.

[SonnyBlackstein]

Well said. He still wont get it though.

FYI youre not helping yourself. Youre not contributing anything of value just stupid potshots which arent clever, needed or entertaining. Do us all a favour and stfu for a while.

[Newyorkempire]

Well said. He still wont get it though.

FYI youre not helping yourself. Youre not contributing anything of value just stupid potshots which arent clever, needed or entertaining. Do us all a favour and stfu for a while.

If you want to side with Wiseguy thats fine. No one over here is going to stfu though. Wrong guy Sonny. Sorry. When respect starts to play out then the potshots will stop. You get it right?

[Wiseguy]

Wiseguy, again, your argument is based on the classic absence of evidence fallacy. There has not been...there has been little... therefor there is none or little.

Yes, this line of reasoning can be true but it does not prove the truth thereof. And because your logical fallacy does not prove anything, I am going to believe a recognized journalist and author over your faulty logic.

Further, this proves a point I've made numerous times on this forum: We all interpret events thru the lens of our personal experience! And whether you realize it or not, you do too!

Admit it! Embrace It!

... Cause when you do, you will realize you could be wrong - like the rest of us realize there is a chance we are wrong. That alone would make your much more bearable to deal with on this board and a much better poster.

Let me explain how each and every one of us are influenced by our experience, including you!

I do not share your long experience on this board an experience that has jaded your thought process against recognizing even the possibility that someone's personal experience may be correct. So I am open to the possibility there is truth in what others say-even when it comes to their personal experience.

On the other hand you have been "traumatized" by your experience with people who use the "location card" to suggest mafia families are larger than they are or you think they are. For example, you dismiss Scott because you do not share his personal experience which has included talking with many people who should know. Something I don't believe you've experienced.

What you fail to see is your personal experience has guided your logic and thought process to the point where you cannot acknowledge your experience could be wrong and another's right. And, isn't this the thing your rail against on this board--people who think their personal experience makes them right?

You do the exact same thing you get all over others for doing, and you don't see it. SMH!

Believe it or not, my "view" doesn't have nearly as much to do with past debates as you think it does. I simply bring those up to show we have been around this block before.

My view doesn't come from my personal experience on the forums. It comes from closely (not casually) observing general trends in the U.S. mob families over the past two decades and seeing an undeniable consistency - where there is a larger, more active, and more formally structured mob presence, we see more indictments. We there isn't the same level of size, activity and structure, we see less indictments or none at all. Once again, this is why we see many cases in New York City, much less so in Philadelphia, and none in San Jose. This phenomenon applies across the board. There are no exceptions, Detroit and Buffalo included.

Regarding Scott, much of his reporting on various things I don't have an issue with. I've also said before I enjoyed his Leonetti book a lot. My primary disagreement with him revolves around Detroit. Why is that? Maybe you weren't around back on the RD forum would put out a Detroit chart out almost every year. These ranged anywhere from 30 to nearly 60 members and were more hierarchical than General Motors. We're talking boss, underboss, street boss, consigliere, at least a few "counselor emeritus," 5 or 6 captains, and dozens of soldiers. This led to a lot of people looking at Detroit the way they used to look at Chicago - a monolithic powerhouse. It was only much later that Scott said that not all of the names on his charts were members. Uh...OK.

So how much am I supposed to take Scott's word for it now? How do we explain the discrepancy between the family totals the FBI reported in the 1980s and 1990s vs. how many he has claimed from 15 years ago to today? How do we explain that considering how many members have died? I'd ask you or anyone else to but you won't because you can't. Just like nobody can explain the wacky math needed to bring Buffalo up to over 30 members today. The only thing they can do is throw out speculation about unknown guys being made in large numbers in families that have been defunct for years, with little in the way of activity. Some how, some way, Buffalo and Detroit buck the trends that have been shown in every other family. Funny how that works.

Highly doubtful Chicago only has 15 guys left. Dont care what the FBI has on file from years past. Not buying it.

Of course you don't. You ignore the numbers regarding Detroit and Buffalo, so naturally you'd ignore them regarding Chicago as well. Nevertheless, let's go through them for again, just for the record. 46-47 members in 1984. 41-45 members in 1985. 42-51 members in 1987. Fast-forward 20 years and they were down to 28 members in 2007. And there's been about a dozen members die since then. Do the math.

But you won't (or can't), will you? Because you're the very definition of a mob fanboy. You don't come here to actually look at this stuff seriously with an objective view of the facts. You come here to basically get off on tales of big, powerful Mafia families. When in doubt, a family being bigger and stronger is your default position. It's more exciting for you. It's rather strange, and frankly juvenile, but it's something we've seen on the forums many times over.

Well said. He still wont get it though.

FYI youre not helping yourself. Youre not contributing anything of value just stupid potshots which arent clever, needed or entertaining. Do us all a favour and stfu for a while.

If you want to side with Wiseguy thats fine. No one over here is going to stfu though. Wrong guy Sonny. Sorry. When respect starts to play out then the potshots will stop. You get it right?

See how you keep making this about sides? Sonny never said he agrees with me or not. Maybe he's just sick of your trolling and never actually bringing anything valuable to a discussion or debate. You just hitch onto the coattails of certain other posters, kiss their asses, take cheap potshots from the rear, and talk like you speak for everyone.

[Newyorkempire]

Wiseguy, again, your argument is based on the classic absence of evidence fallacy. There has not been...there has been little... therefor there is none or little.

Yes, this line of reasoning can be true but it does not prove the truth thereof. And because your logical fallacy does not prove anything, I am going to believe a recognized journalist and author over your faulty logic.

Further, this proves a point I've made numerous times on this forum: We all interpret events thru the lens of our personal experience! And whether you realize it or not, you do too!

Admit it! Embrace It!

... Cause when you do, you will realize you could be wrong - like the rest of us realize there is a chance we are wrong. That alone would make your much more bearable to deal with on this board and a much better poster.

Let me explain how each and every one of us are influenced by our experience, including you!

I do not share your long experience on this board an experience that has jaded your thought process against recognizing even the possibility that someone's personal experience may be correct. So I am open to the possibility there is truth in what others say-even when it comes to their personal experience.

On the other hand you have been "traumatized" by your experience with people who use the "location card" to suggest mafia families are larger than they are or you think they are. For example, you dismiss Scott because you do not share his personal experience which has included talking with many people who should know. Something I don't believe you've experienced.

What you fail to see is your personal experience has guided your logic and thought process to the point where you cannot acknowledge your experience could be wrong and another's right. And, isn't this the thing your rail against on this board--people who think their personal experience makes them right?

You do the exact same thing you get all over others for doing, and you don't see it. SMH!

Believe it or not, my "view" doesn't have nearly as much to do with past debates as you think it does. I simply bring those up to show we have been around this block before.

My view doesn't come from my personal experience on the forums. It comes from closely (not casually) observing general trends in the U.S. mob families over the past two decades and seeing an undeniable consistency - where there is a larger, more active, and more formally structured mob presence, we see more indictments. We there isn't the same level of size, activity and structure, we see less indictments or none at all. Once again, this is why we see many cases in New York City, much less so in Philadelphia, and none in San Jose. This phenomenon applies across the board. There are no exceptions, Detroit and Buffalo included.

Regarding Scott, much of his reporting on various things I don't have an issue with. I've also said before I enjoyed his Leonetti book a lot. My primary disagreement with him revolves around Detroit. Why is that? Maybe you weren't around back on the RD forum would put out a Detroit chart out almost every year. These ranged anywhere from 30 to nearly 60 members and were more hierarchical than General Motors. We're talking boss, underboss, street boss, consigliere, at least a few "counselor emeritus," 5 or 6 captains, and dozens of soldiers. This led to a lot of people looking at Detroit the way they used to look at Chicago - a monolithic powerhouse. It was only much later that Scott said that not all of the names on his charts were members. Uh...OK.

So how much am I supposed to take Scott's word for it now? How do we explain the discrepancy between the family totals the FBI reported in the 1980s and 1990s vs. how many he has claimed from 15 years ago to today? How do we explain that considering how many members have died? I'd ask you or anyone else to but you won't because you can't. Just like nobody can explain the wacky math needed to bring Buffalo up to over 30 members today. The only thing they can do is throw out speculation about unknown guys being made in large numbers in families that have been defunct for years, with little in the way of activity. Some how, some way, Buffalo and Detroit buck the trends that have been shown in every other family. Funny how that works.

Highly doubtful Chicago only has 15 guys left. Dont care what the FBI has on file from years past. Not buying it.

Of course you don't. You ignore the numbers regarding Detroit and Buffalo, so naturally you'd ignore them regarding Chicago as well. Nevertheless, let's go through them for again, just for the record. 46-47 members in 1984. 41-45 members in 1985. 42-51 members in 1987. 47 members in 1993 and 1999. 28 members in 2007. And there's been about a dozen members die since 2007. Do the math.

But you won't (or can't), will you? Because you're the very definition of a mob fanboy. You don't come here to actually look at this stuff seriously with an objective view of the facts. You come here to basically get off on tales of big, powerful Mafia families. When in doubt, a family being bigger and stronger is your default position. It's more exciting for you. It's rather strange, and frankly juvenile, but it's something we've seen on the forums many times over.

Well said. He still wont get it though.

FYI youre not helping yourself. Youre not contributing anything of value just stupid potshots which arent clever, needed or entertaining. Do us all a favour and stfu for a while.

If you want to side with Wiseguy thats fine. No one over here is going to stfu though. Wrong guy Sonny. Sorry. When respect starts to play out then the potshots will stop. You get it right?

See how you keep making this about sides? Sonny never said he agrees with me or not. Maybe he's just sick of your trolling and never actually bringing anything valuable to a discussion or debate. You just hitch onto the coattails of certain other posters, kiss their asses, take cheap potshots from the rear, and talk like you speak for everyone.

Yawn. Like i said countless times. Youre not as smart as you think you are and its finally been exposed. My value has been making sure others dont listen to your shortsighted theories all the way from Utah. You're relevancy on Buffalo is as weak as your relevancy for Detroit. The proof is out, it still is a viable family. You can disagree all you want, means nothing.

[Confederate]

Well said. He still wont get it though.

FYI youre not helping yourself. Youre not contributing anything of value just stupid potshots which arent clever, needed or entertaining. Do us all a favour and stfu for a while.

If you want to side with Wiseguy thats fine. No one over here is going to stfu though. Wrong guy Sonny. Sorry. When respect starts to play out then the potshots will stop. You get it right?

What respect are you talking about? Why do you take it personal that Wiseguy has a different opinion than you about the stupid half dead Buffalo Mafia group? Why does it bother you? Who fucking cares? Are you in the Buffalo Mafia? Is there some kind of personal honor for you that the Buffalo group is alive & well? Does it matter in your life? Give it a rest.

[scott22]

I have to own the fact that in my early reporting/research, before I had a single source on the street outside of my grandpa's jewish bookie pals under Fat Allen, I put the 25 number out for Det LCN in the mid2000s. As the years went on, after more research, with gaining the knowledge that Jack Tocco inducted 2 or 3 batches of fresh blood between 02 and 08 and finding a number of inactive button men previously unaccounted for, the number increased.

SMB

[Newyorkempire]

Well said. He still wont get it though.

FYI youre not helping yourself. Youre not contributing anything of value just stupid potshots which arent clever, needed or entertaining. Do us all a favour and stfu for a while.

If you want to side with Wiseguy thats fine. No one over here is going to stfu though. Wrong guy Sonny. Sorry. When respect starts to play out then the potshots will stop. You get it right?

What respect are you talking about? Why do you take it personal that Wiseguy has a different opinion than you about the stupid half dead Buffalo Mafia group? Why does it bother you? Who fucking cares? Are you in the Buffalo Mafia? Is there some kind of personal honor for you that the Buffalo group is alive & well? Does it matter in your life? Give it a rest.

Valid. +1

[B.]

I used to find the "consigliere emeritus" term more questionable until finding out Detroit used a consiglio that matches that function. Scott was definitely onto something with that before we had an idea what it was.

[NickleCity]

Believe it or not, my "view" doesn't have nearly as much to do with past debates as you think it does. I simply bring those up to show we have been around this block before.

So you are allowed to use personal experience when it bolsters your argument, but others are not? Where is the logic there?

I’d appreciate your argument even more if you were consistent in your logic and in what you allow others to argue or not argue versus what you allow yourself.

My view doesn't come from my personal experience on the forums.

Right! Your have divorced your being from anything personal. Your knowledge has nothing to do with who you are and your experiences.

OK Data, I feel sorry for you because you are not fully human. Data recognized he had something missing, because abstract knowledge isn’t everything. Experience and feeling are a necessary part of humanity and truth. Maybe he was more human than you, cause he recognized something was missing in his knowledge. You don’t seem to grasp this. —The Data character is the early popular postmodern view of knowledge, truth, and humanity. He was self-aware, sapient, sentient and anatomically fully functional male android. Almost human but not quite because he lacked the feelings that go with experience.

Your answer seems to come more from a modern mindset that reached its popular climax in the ‘60’s. In my mind you sound like Spock. He was revered in Startrek as part of a superhuman race w because he divorced himself from feelings and experience and thus could find perfect knowledge and truth.

And for this of you that wonder in StarTrek Deep Space Nine the Data/Spock character has become an hologram. There is no existence at all without feelings and experience.

It comes from closely (not casually) observing general trends in the U.S. mob families over the past two decades and seeing an undeniable consistency

It amazing how you see consistency in the decline of all mafia families and point out how others views aren’t consistent the general macro trend when you can’t even see your own inconsistencies. SMH

Additionally your answers illustrate what is wrong in your logic. Your are apply macro trends to micro environments. There is a reason why Meteorologists study Climatology, (macro trends over macro periods) Synoptic Meteorology, (largescale weather over larger microperiods) and Mesoscale Meterology (microscale weather over true microperiods)

where there is a larger, more active, and more formally structured mob presence, we see more indictments. We there isn't the same level of size, activity and structure, we see less indictments or none at all. Once again, this is why we see many cases in New York City, much less so in Philadelphia, and none in San Jose. This phenomenon applies across the board. There are no exceptions, Detroit and Buffalo included.

There are many things that apply across the meteorological disciplines I mentioned above, but a lot of things change and new thing come up at each level.

Same is likely true as we study the mob. I look at a small area of this study, the Buffalo family and there are things that we apply at the macro level that don’t apply at the micro level with this particular family. I think the same is true with Detroit.

[NickleCity]

My point is we need respect all the disciplines within the study of the mob and learn from each other. Some have a passion for history, some Canada, some Rockford or Chicago, others look at the whole big picture. All I know is I learn something from everyone.

[Wiseguy]

Yawn. Like i said countless times. Youre not as smart as you think you are and its finally been exposed. My value has been making sure others dont listen to your shortsighted theories all the way from Utah. You're relevancy on Buffalo is as weak as your relevancy for Detroit. The proof is out, it still is a viable family. You can disagree all you want, means nothing.

Nice dodge.

I have to own the fact that in my early reporting/research, before I had a single source on the street outside of my grandpa's jewish bookie pals under Fat Allen, I put the 25 number out for Det LCN in the mid2000s. As the years went on, after more research, with gaining the knowledge that Jack Tocco inducted 2 or 3 batches of fresh blood between 02 and 08 and finding a number of inactive button men previously unaccounted for, the number increased.

SMB

Believe it or not, I have a lot of sympathy for how hard it must be to try and initially gather information like that from scratch. I've said before I thought those RD charts were sort of you getting your bearings. Fair enough.

However, that said, I don't imagine there were many (if any) members unaccounted for when the feds had them at 30 members max in 1996. Especially considering it was close to the 23-28 member figures we saw from the FBI from 1984 to 1993. These are consistent numbers over more than a decade.

With a handful of exceptions, the vast majority of those 30 members have all died. Setting aside the extreme improbability of getting as high as 40-45 members by 2008, to even have 20-25 members today, there would have something like 15-20 guys either previously unaccounted for or made during the 2000s.

I'll ask the same question I have a hundred times before. How is it that Detroit (or Buffalo for that matter) is able to maintain it's size (if not grow) while every other remaining family outside NY have shrunk in size? Families who have shown considerably more activity than either of those two for years now.

So you are allowed to use personal experience when it bolsters your argument, but others are not? Where is the logic there?

Are you trying to compare me mentioning the old Detroit debates on the RD forum, which many here will recall, to you claiming you have personal knowledge of a sitting judge in Buffalo who is a made member?

OK Data, I feel sorry for you because you are not fully human. Data recognized he had something missing, because abstract knowledge isn’t everything. Experience and feeling are a necessary part of humanity and truth. Maybe he was more human than you, cause he recognized something was missing in his knowledge. You don’t seem to grasp this. —The Data character is the early popular postmodern view of knowledge, truth, and humanity. He was self-aware, sapient, sentient and anatomically fully functional male android. Almost human but not quite because he lacked the feelings that go with experience.

Your answer seems to come more from a modern mindset that reached its popular climax in the ‘60’s. In my mind you sound like Spock. He was revered in Startrek as part of a superhuman race w because he divorced himself from feelings and experience and thus could find perfect knowledge and truth.

And for this of you that wonder in StarTrek Deep Space Nine the Data/Spock character has become an hologram. There is no existence at all without feelings and experience.

I enjoyed Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation as much as the next guy back in the day but I think you're starting to lose it.

Additionally your answers illustrate what is wrong in your logic. Your are apply macro trends to micro environments. There is a reason why Meteorologists study Climatology, (macro trends over macro periods) Synoptic Meteorology, (largescale weather over larger microperiods) and Mesoscale Meterology (microscale weather over true microperiods)

Same is likely true as we study the mob. I look at a small area of this study, the Buffalo family and there are things that we apply at the macro level that don’t apply at the micro level with this particular family. I think the same is true with Detroit.

I haven't just studied the Mafia in the U.S. just in a general sense over the last 20. I've studied each of the families individually. Far from there being convincing evidence these families are somehow different from the rest, there's plenty of evidence they have followed the same trends.

My point is we need respect all the disciplines within the study of the mob and learn from each other. Some have a passion for history, some Canada, some Rockford or Chicago, others look at the whole big picture. All I know is I learn something from everyone.

I get that.

[cavita]

There we are.

[NickleCity]

I enjoyed Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation as much as the next guy back in the day but I think you're starting to lose it.

This is the kind of arrogance that drives me batty. You say I’m losing it, but you fail to understand what is being said. At is core Star Trek is about the pursuit of knowledge. At a popular level it deals with the great academic and philosophical questions: 1. What is knowledge, 2. What can humans know, and 3. How can humans know it. Specifically this is then branch of philosophy known as epistemology which branches off into alethiology (the study of the nature of truth). Academic articles in these disciplines have referenced the progression of this series and specifically the Data/Spock/ character highlighting our move as a western culture away from a modern understanding of knowledge to a postmodern understanding. Your notion that you can separate knowledge and disembody it from your personal experience is a very modern viewpoint. Postmodern theory arose to counter the shortcomings and excesses of this view of knowledge. For example making knowledge so separate from experience it becomes too abstract to be known. Albeit the pendulum may be swinging too far in the postmodern direction with its emphasis so much on experience that our understanding of knowledge/truth is becoming too subjective. My point is that we need experience and abstract knowledge. One without the other only distorts knowledge and truth. I think your ridding leolensleaking of experience through your bullying has distorted what this board could have known about say Detroit and Buffalo. At the same time you likely corrected the distortion of taking personal experience too far and how that distorted our understanding of the mafia and its various families.

All I am saying is we need each other so these distortions on both sides are limited.

Unfortunately, it appears you will never admit you could be wrong and will continue to have to have the last word in order to control the narrative so the “truth” is distorted in your favor.

[Newyorkempire]

I enjoyed Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation as much as the next guy back in the day but I think you're starting to lose it.

This is the kind of arrogance that drives me batty. You say I’m losing it, but you fail to understand what is being said. At is core Star Trek is about the pursuit of knowledge. At a popular level it deals with the great academic and philosophical questions: 1. What is knowledge, 2. What can humans know, and 3. How can humans know it. Specifically this is then branch of philosophy known as epistemology which branches off into alethiology (the study of the nature of truth). Academic articles in these disciplines have referenced the progression of this series and specifically the Data/Spock/ character highlighting our move as a western culture away from a modern understanding of knowledge to a postmodern understanding. Your notion that you can separate knowledge and disembody it from your personal experience is a very modern viewpoint. Postmodern theory arose to counter the shortcomings and excesses of this view of knowledge. For example making knowledge so separate from experience it becomes too abstract to be known. Albeit the pendulum may be swinging too far in the postmodern direction with its emphasis so much on experience that our understanding of knowledge/truth is becoming too subjective. My point is that we need experience and abstract knowledge. One without the other only distorts knowledge and truth. I think your ridding through your bullying has distorted what this board could have known about say Detroit and Buffalo. At the same time you likely corrected the distortion of taking personal experience too far and how that distorted our understanding of the mafia and its various families.

All I am saying is we need each other so these distortions on both sides are limited.

Unfortunately, it appears you will never admit you could be wrong and will continue to have to have the last word in order to control the narrative so the “truth” is distorted in your favor.

+3