As in other instances when the people I'm discussing something with become overly emotional, I will respond only to the factual part of your post, as that is the only thing of interest to any sane person.
I responded to your post (not your first one, the one about Frank C) because you had made two incorrect assumptions:
1. He didn't say the comment as part of a plan, it was just prison yard talk with his kid.
2. He followed it up with "That's what it's come to," clearly pointing to a diminished Outfit, at least in his mind. I understand that you think his opinion is worthless; on that point we will agree to disagree.
Why is it interesting? Because it is an unvarnished quote from a real mobster who didn't know he was being recorded. Right, wrong, crazy, it was still what he thought at the time.
Take it for what it's worth.
You make some fair points in the less emtional part of your response, though they have already been discussed before.
Again, it was brought up recently, by me, only in the context of wondering who he might have been thinking of if indeed Elmwood Park was shelved at the time.
If that discussion doesn't interst you, that's fine. I think I brought it up in a discussion with Funkster or one of the less volatile posters.
