Carlo Gambino´s rise

[Pete]

Pete, that´s "common knowledge" among those who prefer to read MafiaWiki only. What found on there, on this matter, is a simple and easy explanation (erranous) to a very complex situation not many, due to lack of knowledge, are willing to further explore. Available evidence show that the Bonannos were not involved with Magliocco´s plans of removing Gambino and Lucchese. The Banana wars started due to DiGregorio complaining to Magaddino, an in-law, about being kept out of the race for the consigliere position. And FBI documents show that after Lucchese´s death, informants started to talk about members possibly accepting Bonanno back in as the Family leader, for the sake of peace.

This is what Bonanno said about Gambino´s character (found on page 226 in A Man of honor);

"And this Gambino, where did he get the nerve to challange Profaci? I knew Carlo´s character. He was not a warrior. Given a choise, he avoided violence. He was a squirrel of a man, a servile and cringing individual. When Anastasi was alive, Albert used to use Gambino as his gopher, to go on errands for him. I once saw Albert get so angry at Carlo for bungling a simple assaignment that Albert raised his hand and almost slapped him. In my Tradition, a slap on the face is tantamount to a mortal offense. Another man would not have tolerated such public humiliation. Carlo responded with a fawning grin."

My point is that nowhere did Bonanno describe Gambino as a "a flunky with no brains or ability". He was described as a gopher yes, but never as a brainless individual with no ability. Gambino was nominated by the Commission bosses (Bonanno among them) to succeed Anastasia as a boss. A "brainless individual with no ability" would never have been appointed to that position.[/quote]

You really wanna split hairs here? He basically describes him as a jerkoff I was paraphrasing and I think you can easily get that from the quote above. A gopher bungling simple assignments is very similar to a flunky with no brains come on man[/quote]

That is not the gist of my post made previously and I think you know it. This is the sentence which I have a problem with: "it's common knowledge Bonanno was forced into retirement after trying to have numerous bosses killed including Gambino and Lucchese." Bonanno was still the boss until the Banana wars started in 1966 and then was "replaced" by the Commission. The Magliocco situation occured in 1963. Bonanno was not ostracized due to that. The whole Bonanno situation (him being replaced with DiGregorio) is an extremely complexed matter and a fully satisfactory account for it, can not be found on Mafiawiki.[/quote]

Again I don't know what your talking about bonanno was not recognized by the commission as the boss well before 66 as he was ducking the commission since 63 I think you gotta realize there's a difference in what bonanno says happened and what everyone else said I suppose you can believe what you like though if your taking a man of honor as gospel I got a bridge I can sell you

[HairyKnuckles]

Again I don't know what your talking about bonanno was not recognized by the commission as the boss well before 66 as he was ducking the commission since 63 I think you gotta realize there's a difference in what bonanno says happened and what everyone else said I suppose you can believe what you like though if your taking a man of honor as gospel I got a bridge I can sell you

Lol! Did that same bridge cost you a fortune?

[B.]

Hairy has really done his homework on the Anastasia hit and the Bonanno war. I don't think there is any one right answer, but what he is saying is not just opinion. The Anastasia hit was carried out by a certain faction of the family that was allied with Gambino, but as Hairy says, they weren't simply doing it on Gambino's behalf.

What is interesting is that some wiretaps and information that has come out in recent years actually lends credibility to Joe Bonanno's story. Of course he was an egomaniac and makes himself out to be some kind of mythical hero, but everything he says about Magaddino is essentially backed up by Magaddino's own words in the recordings from his office. Where it gets tricky is the Magliocco and Gambino/Lucchese story, since there are multiple angles there. Apparently when Magliocco was confronted about it, he told the Commission that he was conspiring with Joe Bonanno and Steve Magaddino to overthrow Gambino and Lucchese, but Magaddino denied it.

Here are some of the different reasons given for why Bonanno pissed everyone off:

1. He started the Montreal decina, which pissed off Magaddino who traditionally had crews in Canada.
2. He was building up a sizable west coast crew in Arizona, which wasn't anything new, but he was expanding into California and possibly looking to overthrow the Los Angeles family.
3. He made new members after the books closed in 1957. If this is true, it is likely in reference to members inducted in Montreal and Arizona.
4. He had conspired with Magliocco to kill Gambino/Lucchese and dominate the Commission.
5. He installed his son as consigliere, which pissed off old time members of his own family.
6. When the Commission called him in to discuss some of their concerns, he refused to come in on the grounds that the Commission only sent two representatives when the rule said they were supposed to send three.

You can basically pick and choose / mix and match any of them, but all of these come from the mouths of well-connected mobsters from that time. Numbers 1, 2, 5, and 6 are all facts, but the others are open for debate. Either way a lot of people felt threatened by him and continued to feel threatened even after his faction had been reduced to a shell of its former self. The Bonanno faction was like the tiny Persico faction during the 90's Colombo war if they had influence all over the US, Canada, Sicily, and thirty-five years experience at the top levels of Cosa Nostra. It speaks to his influence and power that he was able to survive the situation and maintain influence for as long as he did.

[Pete]

I do consider him a somewhat underrated figure his 30 years at the head of the family can probably compare with just about anyone not jus for longevity but as noted in this discussion him expanding the families rackets to a degree that the other families felt threatened

[Pete]

We can argue about whether or not Bonanno and his supporters were ultimately forced out of NY (I think he was), but one thing I'd consider definite (ie all sources except the Bonannos themselves agree) is that Joseph Bonanno was absolutely not the Bonanno Boss by 1966. He, his son and his close supporters (John Morale, Joseph Notaro) were busted down to Soldiers by early 1965. February is where most of the initial reports come in. This sidelining is a big reason why Bonanno's son was an informant through the rest of the 1960s. That said, Bonanno continued to have influence with certain factions in the Family and by the 1970s quite a few of the guys in power were former Bonanno supporters.

Edit to add: One of the Bonanno member CIs reported as late as April 1977 that the Morale brothers were still shelved for their involvement in the Bonanno war.

Wait bill was infact an informant? I thought that was just speculation?

[TommyGambino]

Bill was an informant? i wouldn't consider that fact.

[Lupara]

Am I the only who finds Magliocco's plan to take out Gambino and Lucchese peculiar to say the least? Did he really expect that he could take out two more powerful bosses just like that? I can't imagine that these hits were seriously considered. We really need to dig into this because I smell another Mafia myth comparable to the Night of the Sicilian Vespers.

[Dwalin2014]

Am I the only who finds Magliocco's plan to take out Gambino and Lucchese peculiar to say the least? Did he really expect that he could take out two more powerful bosses just like that? I can't imagine that these hits were seriously considered. We really need to dig into this because I smell another Mafia myth comparable to the Night of the Sicilian Vespers.

Why? Gambino and Lucchese were powerful, but still mortal. They would probably be difficult to kill and whoever did this would face retaliation, but powerful criminals get whacked all the time in all parts of the world. While not everybody is equal in front of the law, everybody is equal in front of the bullet/bomb/poison etc.

[Pogo The Clown]

Magliocco would have been in the right as both Lucchese and Gambino were tryng to depose him and were backing the Gallos in their revolt. There was precendent for it as Anastasia got away with killing Mangano and the faction that killed Anastasia got away with by claiming self defense. Granted it was within their own family but Magliocco had a soid case for self defense.


Pogo

[Pete]

Am I the only who finds Magliocco's plan to take out Gambino and Lucchese peculiar to say the least? Did he really expect that he could take out two more powerful bosses just like that? I can't imagine that these hits were seriously considered. We really need to dig into this because I smell another Mafia myth comparable to the Night of the Sicilian Vespers.

I've been reading honor thy father and in the book they seem to portray it like bonanno was unknowingly brought in on the plot which only resulted in only one very weak attempt and that it was basically all magliocco not sure I buy it but that's how it's portrayed

[B.]

The story the Bonannos tell is that Bill Bonanno was living with Magliocco, who was his relative by marriage, and that he unknowingly took a ride with Magliocco where an order was given to Joe Colombo, who in turn reported to Gambino/Lucchese that the Bonannos were backing Magliocco. Personally I do believe that the Bonannos were involved in some kind of conspiracy with Magliocco and that he would not have acted on his own.

I also believe there is truth to the story that Magaddino was initially involved as well, which is apparently what Magliocco initially told the Commission but Magaddino denied it.

[HairyKnuckles]

Sometime after becoming boss, Carlo Gambino created a "fund" by taxing Gambino members. The money was supposedly for Gambino members who found themselves in legal trouble. This fund was administered by captain Domenico Arcuri (father of Joey A.) who operated out of the Upper East Side area. But Gambino used the fund for his personal needs, probably for business investments. According to informant, any member who questioned Gambino´s honesty regarding this fund, could find himself in seriuos trouble. Vito Genovese had done something similar in 1958 when he was indicted for narcotics violation. He demanded his soldiers to pay for his legal fees. I just want to point that out to those who say that Joe Profaci was the cheapest boss in Mafia history.

[Pogo The Clown]

Joe Massino also had such a fund ging in the early 2000s. I believe each member had to contirbute 100 dollars (maybe it was 200) every month.


Pogo

[B.]

Apparently Profaci and then Magliocco collected a tax from members based on a similar premise, i.e. to help fund the Gallo war and to help with legal fees. It wouldn't surprise me if they kept most of it for themselves.

It seems like this may have been how old time bosses justified asking for tribute from their members, rather than just saying "Give me a cut of your proceed because I'm the boss."

[brianwellbrock]

Joe Massino also had such a fund ging in the early 2000s. I believe each member had to contirbute 100 dollars (maybe it was 200) every month.


Pogo

Yeah 100 a month. The smarter thing would ve saying the money will also help fund other rackets for the fsmily to get in and money from said racket everybody will get a cut.