By the way Rooster, why did you hassle me to answer your questions that I missed, but now you refuse to answer the same questions I've been asking throughout the thread?

And by the way, the offer is still open. If Rooster can name "over 40" confirmed members of the Buffalo mob (as he claims they have) then I will concede that I'm wrong. Rooster, I don't expect a response from you since you're very, very selective about replying to me, but what do you say to this offer ^. In fact, Rooster, if you even give me a source which says Buffalo present-day (or within the last decade) has 40+ members, I will concede I'm wrong.

And pmac, you know how you said "the feds basically said Violi is underboss" or something along those lines? Well, if you can show me where the feds said Violi is the underboss of the Buffalo mob (which I'm assuming is what you're referring to), I'll concede that I'm wrong and that Buffalo is still an active crime family.

And Rooster, if you can prove that the Ciminelli bust is, in any way, connected to the Buffalo crime family, then I will concede I'm wrong. And no, I don't mean "Well Ciminelli used to be a union guy on the take), I mean actual, tangible proof that the Mafia was involved, in any way, shape or form, in the illegal activities that Ciminelli was busted for.

And Rooster, if you can give me any tangible proof that Brian Cohen was not working with the Luccheses, but was actually a Buffalo/Todaro crime family associate during this period, I'll concede that I'm wrong.

And, lastly, if you would at least just answer my questions, that would really, really, really go a long way for your credibility. Because your argument of "Oh well, this forum isn't my life so I sometimes miss your posts" only goes so far. It's beyond 'missing a couple questions here and there.' You're straight-up ignoring certain questions that are fundamental to your narrative.