pp,my logic is flawed? im going off the same 'guesses' you are? no offense here, but i could tell you more about neil than you could read in any book. dont get on your computer out in wyoming and tell me you know more than a man whos eaten dinner with my family?ive forgot more about 'oniel' than you will ever know. when i say 'hes not a rat'.i dont mean it,i know it. read my posts here,i know what im talking about. ive lived in the same neighborhood for fifty four years. where the fuck do you live? who did you 'come up' with?you dont know jack shit about this 'thing',and thats fine.you dont want to believe what i say. fine.but to say im 'naive' or an idiot for stating what i know.about a man i know? thats fucking stupid. this is the internet.i realize you can say what you like,but id recomend working on your fucking 'people skills'.
ive said what i have to say. i wont respond anymore in this thread. if you sincerely disagree with me feel free to message me.i wont be a party to some internet-'beef'.
No offense Sit, but PP is not stating YOU are naive. He is stating that dismissing the thought of Dellacroce been informant, COULD be naive.
It doesn't make sense at all. If he was an informant, he did a lousy job considering the FBI couldn't touch Carlo before he died, and they struggled immensely to pin anything on Gotti.
Dellacroce being an informant? Absolute rubbish. He was as hard as they come and his loyalty to Cosa Nostra should never be questioned.
Well, Scarpa was tough as nails too. Who would have thought him being an informant before it was revealed?
Don´t get me wrong. I´m not saying Neil was an informant, neither should my reply to these two posts be considered leaning towards this an inch. But to dismiss somebody being/been an informant because the dude was tough and hard, is naive.
![[Linked Image]](http://i1364.photobucket.com/albums/r729/michaeld78/Namnls000_zps164d4a3d.png)
