Could Steven Crea be the next Cpo di tutti capi

I know the title died with Massimo but this guy is making waves could he be the next Gigante or Gotti?

he's definitely more low key but has been a great boss so far. May have to wait a few more years but i would say yes

How do you know he's making waves? I haven't heard a thing on the guy since he became boss

hes always been a great earner

Completely agree there but I wanna know what Lombardo knows on this.

He's a construction boss thats his main source of income but the guy sounds well respected

i think the next capo dei capi would be a genovese o gambino boss

True I don't think a Lucchese Boss as ever been the chief. Overall they're a stable Family, and Crea has helped with that, but I think that in today's day and age you're unlikely to see that position even being informally held like Massino did.
And even if such a rank were to exist again, I agree with m2w it would be a Genovese or Gambino Boss as they are the two strongest

maybe dom cefalu

He's too low key. If word got out to the Feds he somehow became Boss of all Bosses the FBI would go ballistic and indict his ass in a month. Like I said, at this present time, no one will get that rank, and I don't think anyone does. It attracts too much attention

Cefalu the Boss of Bosses?! It wouldn't happen. He's Sicilian. It could cause a divide similar to what Galante did. Then the bodies would start showing up. The Feds would love that though.

There is no such thing as boss of all bosses in America. That ended in 1931 when the commission was invented.

People 'supposedly' led it though. For example from 1957-1976 Carlo Gambino controlled the commission, though technically he wasn't 'Capo di tutti Capi'

Yeh its called the 'Chairman' but John Gotti being the 'unofficial Chairman' is nonsense especially being number 2 to the chin. Plus that wikipedia information is just crap anyways.

There is no thing like Capo Di Tutti Capi anymore in the US and same goes for Sicily.

Gigante was Chairman, not Gotti.

FBI should be worrying more about terrorists instead of the mob

Although, Carlo Gambino possibly held the title through the fear and respect he generated.

Carlo was the true Godfather no doubt about that. The most powerful boss in New York today has to be Cefalu or Crea. Bellomo would be up there but he's not technically 'boss'. Hell no one really knows anything when it comes to the Genovese's.

id say quiet dom and benny eggs are the 2 highest guys in the genovese

You forgot Barney Bellomo, Mario Gigante and Daniel Leo. I'd also think that Larry Dentico is higher then Quiet Dom, as Larry was official consigliere whereas Dom was acting. I also figured due to Dom's health, he remains capo - although with lots of power.

Couple of questions. Leo is due out of prison soon. I heard he was dropped as Acting Boss. Is he still high up? Also I assumed Mario Gigante was retired. And how active is Quiet Dom?

oh yeah forgot about Mario Gigante and Daniel Leo. you dont think quit dom and benny eggs have more power since their age?

Age doesn't guarantee mobsters power. Albert Facchiano was a soldier when he was in his nineties. His capo was in his seventies.

Anyway, wasn't Benny Eggs now confined to a wheelchair with various health problems. The guy is ninety and will never become boss.

Mario Gigante is 90 also

so quite dom, barney, and leo are probably on top

Although he is retired, Mario is like Costello after stepping down in 1957 - an inactive soldier, but from time to time is called upon to give advice because of their standing.

Big three doing well- Genovese, Gambino, Lucchese
Not doing well- Bonanno, Colombo

Saying that the Bonanno and Colombo families are doing bad is based on overall perception. As it stands, both families current leadership is unclear and they may be small, but that doesn't mean they will make less money. I keep an open mind on current mob matters. Anything could happen.

My only thoughts are how the Bonanno and Colombo Family especially hold on to their rackets in Construction and Local Unions when they get guys thrown in jail? Gambling and loansharking aren't problems, but the other rackets?

I don't really follow the big five that much. But when did Lucchese earn a spot with the big 3?

I always thought they were dead last in terms of overall quality. That might be an outdated perception tho.

I think the Lucchese family received the bump up when Massino and others began flipping in the late 1990s - early 2000s.

I always wondered that too.. if a guy is a partner in 3 companies and he gets life what happens to those business interests?

Ever since Crea got out of prison and his parole expired in 2009 he's been running things. He's been a steady Boss so far, he's one of the main reasons why they're back. The Bonanno Family was way more powerful when Massino was in charge (1991-2004), but after he flipped they've been struggling ever since while the Lucchese's have rebuilt

So the Colombo's and Bonnano families can build up to close to 200 members? Entrench themselves in Unions, Carting, and work joint ventures with the other families in a short period of time? The Genovese and Gambino families will forget all thier fuck ups and reconize them again?

That would be really hard. The Bonanno's are down but not out, they could rebuild with the proper leadership. The Colombo's just can't seem to avoid indictment. They're not going down at all no way, but they have about 60-70 guys on the street and 100 made. To get it up to 200 again like in the old days would be extremely difficult. Plus getting away with stuff in Unions is tougher than it used to be but Families like the Genovese's and the Gambino's are still involved in them.

+1. Yes. As long as there is a Commission, there can never be a boss of bosses.
According to Vitale (I think it was) the last Commission meeting was held 12 years ago but as far as we know, the Commission has not been dismantled.

Carlo Gambino wasn´t made the official boss until 1960. During the years between 1957 and 1960 he served as the acting boss. You can find this in FBI documents on the Mary Farrell Foundation site. As an acting boss, Gambino could not not have controlled the Commission.
After the murder of Anastasia, the family was divided and Gambino was given the task by the Commission to restore order in the Family. In 1960, the Family elected Gambino the official boss.

Guys, I´m sorry to say it, but you are relying too much on Wikipedia. Using Wikipedia is easy and accessible, but extremely unreliable when it comes to sharing knowledge on the Mafia. But you have to dig a lot deeper in order to come closer to the truth. No boss was ever a boss of bosses after the creation of the Commission. Not even technically speaking. Having a boss of bosses on the Commission would undermine the purpose and functions of it. It´s two completely different systems of rule that can never be combined. All Families, especially those on the Commission, was autonomous. All bosses on there ruled their own Families and to allow somebody else to exert pressure or secretly control your Family would be a sign of weakness and a sure way to lose face.
When the Bonanno Family lost its seat on the Commission, perhaps as early as 1975 when Rastelli was sent away, it looks like the Family was governed by the Commission. I can´t think of any other cases where sitting Families on the Commission were controlled by it. Can you?

Remember Genovese became Boss in 1957 and was Boss of Bosses for two years supposedly then Bonanno was chairmen of the commission for 3 then Gambino took it after the Commission rivaled against the Bonanno's remember CDTC is a de-facto title given to the Boss all other commission Bosses support of cource in recent years with the unknown Bosses it is unknown who holds the title.

Also i'd like to add thanks for all of you making this post big this quick i'm glad you all find it interesting.

Hairy, Couldn't of said it better

There's not been an actual boss of bosses since Salvatore Maranzano.

Massino never held that position the media labelled him boss of bosses just like everyone else since Maranzano. Only because he was the last official boss on the streets the Gambino and Genovese acting bosses would've been more powerful .

I doubt Benny is even active he's going blind aand is confined to a wheelchair.

As Hairy said i think you're relying on wikipedia too much.

In the mob money is everything right?!so...who has more money than the others,his the wealthiest than the others,he has most of the business to him self,most of the connections,politicans,cia,transatlantic connections,most dangerous crews and lots of others tuff....so my point is when some of the bosses dont have shit and need connections for anything and they all depend on that person(cuz he's the boss with the connections)....how do you call that person????

When has that ever been the case though? When have the other families ever not had shit and relied on one boss? Imo never so i still don't think there's been a boss of bosses since the start of the comission.

Right, even though position is not officially recognized, they can be de facto "boss of bosses". It's like arguing the US is not most powerful nation on earth because it has an equal vote at the United Nations.

Im not sayin the title "boss of bosses" exists,but what ht2 just sad is the truth.And no1 can deny that!!!

It's not at all though when Maranzano was boss of bosses he could override any of the other bosses decisions since the commission that's not been possible .

No it's not if it was the same the US would've been able to overrule all the nations who voted to recognize Palestine for example that's essentially what the boss of bosses could do.

ITs all about wealth,power and connections and violence of course,if every1 on the table is dead who's gonna vote?!after that you just place your ppl and you get "Roman Empire",theres always a leader,official or not,thats the ppl's nature,if theres no1 who can guide them there will be an internal war!How can thives and killers get a long if theres no1 with the biggest "gun" on the table?

There's not been a boss of bosses since Maranzano they vote and come to agreements . Of course at any given time there's been a most powerful boss but he's never been some kind of dictator whhatever he says goes which is what the boss of bosses is which is why it didn't last very long.

Get it into your head everyone. Since 1931 Boss of all bosses has never existed!!

Read the posts first,than put a comment!pls

Thats true they never last long,but thats why theres always a guy less powerful than him but at the same time more powerful than the others,to replace him

He's right though

Maranzano was the last one he didn't last long.

Well I have read the comments...

ok i know that,but my point is about the most powerful boss on the table(Luciano,Genovese,Gambino,Galante,Castellano...),not that he's a dictator and stuff but he has a little bit more of a...how should i say...your gettin me right?

I agree with that totally he has a bit more influence i already said that in one of my other posts all i was saying was there hasn't been a boss of bosses since Maranzano.. i'm guessing that was just a break down of communications there

You are right!

Hey Camarel,what do you think about the Chicago outfit,aside the 5 fam.There was a post here and it was explained that the capos in Chi aint like the capos in NY,they are more of a..like local bosses so they are all under one boss right?!like in the Accardo years

It seems the Chicago outfit is alot different than ny their capos are almost like bosses themselves since they have a number of Lieutenants under them who in turn have soldiers under them. So you're kinda right i think it goes associate>soldier>lieutenant>capo>boss.

hairy massino claimed the last time the commission met was in 1985. http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-04-16/news/29453013_1_joe-waverly-gambino-boss-joseph-massino he does mention the meeting of 2000 but that only a handfull of guys showed up.

What Massino meant about the meeting in 85 was that it was the last time the 5 official bosses met yigido.

I think I read somewhere that the Commission met in 2000. And that Massino presided over the meeting. (Doesn´t make him a boss of bosses though... ) I remember thinking to myself that the source seems reliable. But I can´t say where I read it.

Carlo Gambino held that position. You know the guy's hopes and dreams that took him along before emmigrating to the U.S. How powerful he wanted to be, and that he had to have Anastasia murdered as he felt time was passing him by.

Any proof of this? Please share. Don´t be shy.

Just my opinion but i don't think Gambino was ever officially the Boss Of bosses. But i do think after Genovese got put away and up to his death that Gambino was the most powerful mobster around and had tremendous power to sway commision votes his way.

It's a self induced belief. Just like the other poster saying that Salvatore Maranzano was the one and only Boss of Bossses. Also, he doesn't have proof that Maranzano was the one and only in that position. The older mob history is more hazy then todays, so who really knows what happened.

We all go by what we read.

Also a self belief was the poster who created those mob charts. He placed Vincent Asaro as captain and Vincent Badalamenti as acting boss. My belief is that Asaro, Badalamenti and Vito Grimaldi are candidates, with all three possibly running the Bonanno family until one is chosen.

Cheers to this poster - he said exactly what I wanted to say. Though I refer to Gambino as Boss of Bosses, other people here shouldn't feel the need to correct me. If I am wrong about something, then through sources and my book writing on the mob, I will learn the truth and correct myself. Others correcting me only strengthens my need to believe something false.

Everything you said is correct but the boss of bosses doesn't need to sway votes his way there's no votes he decides everything which is why there hasn't been one since Maranzano.

You don't need proof to correct this simple discussion. Luciano killed Maranzano because he held the postition of Capo di tutti Capi, and changed he mafia by changing the structure of the american mafia to have a commission. Ok, maybe Carlo Gambino was in his time the most influencial and powerful boss in America but he still was not the Boss os Bosses, simply because that position has not existed since 1931.

"It's a self induced belief. Just like the other poster saying that Salvatore Maranzano was the one and only Boss of Bossses. Also, he doesn't have proof that Maranzano was the one and only in that position. The older mob history is more hazy then todays, so who really knows what happened."

DeMeo, nobody here said that Maranzano was the one and only boss of bosses. But he was the last one.
And actually, there are a lot of accounts of what happened during the early history of the mob. I´m sure you have heard about Joe Valachi, right? Nicolo Gentile? Joe Bonanno? Mike Dash? David Critchley? John Dickie? The FBI???

Who's Joe Valachi? Did he flip on Joey Massino?

Exactly but there's no accounts of anyone since Maranzano being boss of bosses. Since Maranzano it's been a position the media has bestowed upon the most powerful boss of that time.

Yeh he was 101 years old

Correct. He was not the Boss of Bosses but he was the most powerful mobster on the commision from the time Genovese was locked up until his death. IMHO after Lucchese died no one had the juice Gambino had.

Carlo even had influence with Lucchese, their children married each other.

if their was a boss of bosses position their would be much more conflicts between the five families.

their would be people using violence to get this position. how men like gotti and genovese aimed for the boss position. wouldnt matter how much influence you had a bullet is enough.

so this also proves that such a position never existed maybe before the 30's but then again i aint know

The title "boss of bosses" is mostly potrayed by the media in the past(even now) with articles like"They killed Galante,Boss of Bosses"...but yet theres always the most powerful,supreme crime boss on the table(even if its only for a short time)

The funniest thing about the media saying that is Galante wasn't the most powerful boss the other families didn't even recognize him as boss but of course attaching boss of bosses to his name makes it seem much more important .

In this thread, the Commission meeting of 2000 is discussed.

http://www.gangsterbb.net/threads/ubbthr...true#Post658324

Interesting comment written by some dude on yahoo groups-american mafia.....

I can understand a respected Mob pioneer like Morello being called in to
arbitrate out of town squabbles, but how could he possibly be expected to fairly
arbitrate beefs in New York where he had a stake. Suppose someone had a beef
with Morello. It would be like having issues at the job and you find out that
your boss and your union rep are the same guy. It wouldn't work. Why do we
knowingly mangle the language? If someone is meant to be the Supreme Arbiter why
do we continue to call him the Boss of Bosses. A boss and an arbitrator are two
different things. Who would kill or strive to be an arbitrator? And who would
accept the counsel of someone who murdered the previous arbitrator?
> > Lets go thru the period of 1890-1928.
> > 1890-1910 Morello. The originaL BOB. Where did his authority come from? Did
he arrive in the US with the title? It is the equivalent of George Washington
arriving on the Mayflower and being given the title of President. President of
what? At what point did the other Bosses feel the need to appoint a Supreme
Arbitrator? The American Mafia was just getting established. What was there to
be Boss of Bosses over? There was one family in New York and Morello was it's
leader, so I guess you could definitely argue that Morello was the BOB of New
York. Fair enough. But the rest of the country? How could things have evolved so
quickly? There would have had to be meetings, conferences, and conventions.
Transportation and communication was not nearly what it is today. These guys
were starting from scratch. They had organizations to start up and run. It would
be like the Pilgrims landing at Plymouth Rock and deciding that they needed a
National Government. I don't dispute the fact that Morello advised bosses in
other cities. It would make perfect sense for arguing parties to consult a
respected out of towner who had no dog in the fight. But that situation sounds
rather informal, which makes sense. It is the man that is trusted, not the
title. What is the need to elevate Morello's status to be Boss of all Bosses. He
ran his family, and provided non-binding arbitration to outside families. We
like to ask for facts to be proven here. So I ask what proof do we have that
Morello was ever truly appointed as Boss of Bosses. I find a lot of reasons to
find this scenario highly improbable. Boss of the only Family and therefore the
New York Mafia, sure. The American Mafia? I don't see it.
> > 1910-1928 D'Aquila. Other Families were forming and with them came inter
family violence. Clear evidence that no one was running the show. also in the
face of Camorra violence there is little evidence of a united Mafia front.
wouldn't a Boss of Bosses been the one to marshall the forces. This didn't
happen. To say that he was supposed to be The Head Arbitrator makes no sense,
because he couldn't be expected to rule fairly when his interests conflicted
with those of other families. He would no longer be arbitrating but bossing. The
very thing that we say he was not supposed to be doing. And then he was killed.
> > So at what point of time was the role of Boss of Bosses an effective
governing position? I argue that the data shows that it really never was. It
seems particularly misleading to claim that in the formative years of the
American Mafia a certain few men were the Boss of Bosses, but by that we mean
Supreme Arbiter. And they were all from New York which means that arbitration
with other New York Families would have been imposing your will or bossing
them. That is not an effective or logical paradigm for leadership, and because
of that no true leadership existed. to say that the Boss of Bosses system was
replaced by the Commission is in effect making the argument that there truly was
a Boss of Bosses system. Well if that is the case what is it's origin? How did
it come to be? Who were it's Founding Fathers? What did they envision?
> >
> > If by self-preservation you mean that Luciano saw no future in continuing
to participate in this violent hodge-podge so be it. We all agree about the
enormously important role New York played in the American Mafia. The Commission
brought order in an intelligent way to New York, a reasonable and fair way of
settling disputes. We know it's origins, and it is logically sound. Neither can
be said about Boss of Bosses. so how can we be so sure that they ever existed.

This is a FBI report explaining the chain of command in LCN.
Note that no boss of bosses is mentioned and it also states "The Commissione is the ultimate and final authority in this organisation."

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=94909&relPageId=6

In here, note the words "each boss of a group or a family enjoys the same prestige as all other bosses throughout the country, despite the fact that certain families might be much larger and much more powerful than others."

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=981000

In the early 1960s, while Bonanno served as the chairman of the Commission, Bonanno´s proposal of dismantling the LA Family and to send his guys to LA to take over was rejected by the Commission members. Just to prove my point that the chairman of the Commission was never regarded as the boss of bosses, read this part

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=981004

Here is a small part of Valachi´s account in regards to the transition of power from the boss of bosses to the Commission

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=980885

Here is an informant saying that there hasn´t been a boss of bosses since Lucky Luciano became boss

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=1401951

There are multiple reports that can be found on the MFF site saying the same. I honestly can go on and on.

As of the votes on the Commission. They all counted the same. No matter how powerful a boss was or how many soldiers he had under his command, his vote still counted the same. Check out Bill Bonanno´s last book. He goes into great detail of the functions, protocol and the proceedings of the Commission. Extremely interesting. If you are interested, pick up the book.

The best proof is he was forced to resign.


The same informant also says Vito Genovese is the "most powerful boss in the New York area".




At the table they were equals (in theory anyway) but outside the boardroom this was not the case. You have to take into account power politics. As proof: Joe B. would plot to kill Gambino and Lucchese. Why would he see them as a threat if they were equals? If they were all equals how did Bonanno's get expelled? Over drugs?

Either way there will no one will ever hold the rank again, no one will preside over the Commission anymore because they haven't met in years. And the fact that it's too risky, known wiseguys all in one place, meeting in a bar or restaraunt. If the Feds got a hold of that juicy piece of news...
Now it is certainly possible that Crea could became the most successful Boss the Lucchese's have had for years. That I would be willing to bet on.

^ ^ ^ True!I dont know why ppl cant understand this....THERES ALWAYS A TOP SPOT!!!no matter if it exists or not,theres always a top guy!Voting?!?!?LOL(yes theres voting but every1 first waits for the top guys decision)...i mean we are talking about ego maniacs,mafia bosses and they care only about power and money,and some guys here will say"Give me a proof,give me a proof,or you read wikkipedia"Its hilarious!!!!GO WATCH THE STREETS YOU FOOL!i mean stop reading articles written by some schmucks or read books or watch movies,some of you got it worng!Yes you can read articles but only on history,you cant find book about everydays life on the streets,belive me it ownt be true!I can see that some guys here never walked the streets,just imagine the streets infront of their computer or book or whatever and yall belive in honor!Go outside a lil bit!Feel it!But if yall over 25,than youre late,sorry and stop buzzin nonsence...and go write some book on the basis of Joe Bonanno's fake memoars

"As proof: Joe B. would plot to kill Gambino and Lucchese. Why would he see them as a threat if they were equals? If they were all equals how did Bonanno's get expelled? Over drugs?"

Bonanno´s expulsion had nothing to do with drugs and his alleged involvement in Magliocco´s plot to get rid of Gambino and Lucchese was resolved during a meeting in 1963.
Bonanno´s relationship with his cousin Magaddino had for a long time slowly deteriorated. Magaddino accused Bonanno for being power hungy and Bonanno suspected Magaddino for being jealous and secretly having a desire of controlling his Family in New York. They didn´t trust eachother anymore.

Gaspar DiGregorio, a Bonanno captain (and backed by Magaddino) placed a formal request with the Commission complaining about the election of Bill Bonanno for consigliere had been conducted in an unlawful manner. This snowballed into what later became the Bananas war. But Magaddino used DiGregorio for his purposes, while Gambino and Lucchese used Magaddino for their purposes.

Bonanno´s book goes into great detail in regards to this but the gist of it all is that Bonanno refused to come in for Commission meetings when called for. According to Bonanno, the Commission had lost its legitimacy due to a number of infractions. And this consquently led to Bonanno´s expulsion.

Yes, nicely put. And that is the ultimate answer to this thread´s question.

"True!I dont know why ppl cant understand this....THERES ALWAYS A TOP SPOT!!!no matter if it exists or not,theres always a top guy!"

- I understand that you don´t understand. You seem confused.

"Voting?!?!?LOL(yes theres voting but every1 first waits for the top guys decision)...i mean we are talking about ego maniacs,mafia bosses and they care only about power and money,and some guys here will say"Give me a proof,give me a proof,or you read wikkipedia""

- Well yeah. To claim something without being able to prove it should be formulated in a different way than how you are formulating stuff. And please name your sources or paste the whole article into a post. Not only parts of it that suits your purposes.

"Its hilarious!!!!GO WATCH THE STREETS YOU FOOL!"

- If I´m a fool, then what are you?

"i mean stop reading articles written by some schmucks or read books or watch movies,some of you got it worng!Yes you can read articles but only on history,you cant find book about everydays life on the streets,belive me it ownt be true!I can see that some guys here never walked the streets,just imagine the streets infront of their computer or book or whatever and yall belive in honor!Go outside a lil bit!Feel it!But if yall over 25,than youre late,sorry and stop buzzin nonsence...and go write some book on the basis of Joe Bonanno's fake memoars""

- What are you basically trying to say here? Could you rephrase that please? Should we stay inside and write a book or go out and "feel" the streets?

Sorry...was i talking to you?who are you?plsss dont answer my posts,i told you once.Rmember im not talking to you....so plsss dont make me become rude,kid.plsss go away,go play,leave me alone

I love the way you are addressing me. "Kid".
Well, for your information, I could be your father. Literally.

ok,good for you,maybe you love something else too ,dont want any problems...bye bye

toodoped why are you acting like a douche?
is it because people have different opinions than you do?

Nope thats not the thing,the thing is when i give my opinion other ppl think that im talking to them...REMEMBER...when i give my opinion,its just an opinion to discuss it.not that imsayin"your not right"...dont get your ego invloved...look at the facts,get your ego aside yigifdo...look at the posts,do you see me talkin to that guy hairy whatever....by the way yigido i dont see any informative posts from you buddy?!?!?

The Colombo and Bonanno families are not going to grow to 200 inducted members. The families are basically restricted to roughly these numbers of members:
Genovese & Gambino= 200+ (these two have always been the biggest in terms of numbers)
Colombo/Bonnano/Luchese = about 110 max. (give or take)
These numbers were determined by the Commision years ago. These limits ensure no one family becomes too powerful. The induction of new members traditionally has been controlled by passing a list of potential inductees to each of the Five Families administration for review. Below is an example found when A Genovese member was arrested:
I don't know how to copy and paste the fucking thing..trust me it exists over on the RD.

Toodoped, its fine to have your opinions etc, but we are just trying to correct you in this discussion.

But surely, the Genovese and Gambino families having more members then the other three automatically makes them more powerful.

When you say the Commission determined the size of each family, do you mean by vote? Why would Joseph Bonanno, Gaetano Gagliano and Joseph Profaci let themselves be talked into having lesser groups?

What gave Lucky Luciano the right to dictate to other bosses - remember, the Boss of Bosses title died with Maranzano. By dictating to them, to have that power would make Luciano the Boss of Bosses.

Also, I read somewhere that the Commission wasn't in the habit of dictating overall mob policy, but was there as a listening panel to stop conflicts and discuss business.

As to passing around the list of prospective members. Why would another family need to get involved. Surely, each family can rule it self and sort things that need to be sorted out.

Thats fine with me,im with it,belive me

Yo Hairy...answer(now dont get too happy youre still on ignore)...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerd

feel something....than talk.see ya

This is only funny in Macedonia, I guess.

Toodoped just stop it

I hate it when we have perfectly lucid discussions (though the thread was a little stupid in the first place) and one guy has to bitch and moan about nothing. Ridiculous.

Agreed Joe i've just ignored this infantile argument i suggest you join me

My pleasure Camarel

everything's cool! (izvn.druze al to je jebiga )

This system is only in place in NYC because you have 5 families all in one city. It is necessary to make sure there was no objections to someone being made. Another family may have information about a prospective member that his own family doesn't know about. It's like a background check. It also ensures peace since someone can't be made if another family has a grievance with him that needs to be solved. When Ralph DeSimone was proposed into the Genovese family, his name was passed along and the Luccheses said he was a rat. The Geovese family had him killed in 1991.

And your right about the Commission. When it first started, the bosses only met entirely once every 5-10 years. Otherwise, they only met when there was a major dispute. So it seems hard to believe that one boss can wield so much influence over the Commission that they could be considered a defacto boss of all bosses. That's not to say guys like Luciano and Gambino didn't have greater influence than the co-members on the Commission, though.

Stated in Raabs 'Five Families' he explains when they met in Chicago when the commission was set up "The size of each family was fixed at the number of made men it had at that time, with replacements allowed only for dead members. Freezing the strength of each borgata was intended to prevent surreptitious expansions to dominate other families and possibly ignite territorial conflicts. Limiting membership was also seen as a business-like means of selecting the best and most competent candidates."

I don't think the New York Commission meets anymore, and I'm confident that most of the bosses of the 5 families are not on personal terms.

Last meeting was 2000 or 2001.

I personally do not think they meet as in five all together but bosses meet in twos maybe to discuss business partnerships.

Well that's for sure! Not only bosses but the capos etc

Yup. In Gravano's book he says that Gigante was mad at Castellano for calling a meeting between them. He felt that their capos should have met to discuss their construction rackets. And this was in the 80s.

That we know of.

Seems the last decade all official boss positions have been filled with guys in jail and the only people on the outside are ruling panels and acting bosses making it impossible for anyone to claim the Capo di tutti capi title remember when genovese was arrested bonanno de facto took the title

I don't know..it seems in this day in age why risk face to face on an organization that "seems" more ceremonial than actually practical. Besides, they'd be better to pass messages via carrier pigeon than pick up a phone/text/email/skype...

[quote=Strax]There is no thing like Capo Di Tutti Capi anymore in the US and same goes for Sicily. [/quo





Toto riina and Bernardo provenzano were both considered that but that's been years ago idk bout now

I heard that Vito Spatafore was the Capo di Tutti Frutti.

Yeah. But some say he was a fruit case.

Yeah, I agree with you! I haven't heard a peep out of Crea and that is good news same as Frankie Cal.

- Why would Crea put that bullseye on his head ?

-And the same with the Gambinos ,putting up a boss and saying it.

-Not that the other familys are having luck ,the rotating pannel looks to be working (westside)

-And the other famlys are using a boss in prison as a head
(Persicos) (Bonanno)