OMG... Your article that you base everything off of stated in its hey day Buffalo had 200 made men.
I took that # cut it in 1/2.
So it's 1,000,000 % opposite of what you are saying.
+ if you read the whole post and the ones before and after, the point I was making was that whatever the # was of made men.
Both sides of the argument can technically be correct.
If a family once had 200 Or 100 made members and now they have only 20-30
L.E. Or whomever can say the family is DEAD compared to what it used to be.
Get it 100-200 down to 20-30 DEAD
But you said something along the lines of - "say the family has 100 men and they take a huge hit, they still have 30-40 men" - i'm paraphrasing, but I'll find the original quote if you want. That implies that the family had 100 men at some point in recent history. Which is not true. By 1990 - before the big RICO trials, union oversight, racket busting - the family had 45 members. You see what I'm getting at? Natural attrition had already, by 1990, diminished the family to a quarter the size of what it allegedly was in its heydey. So you've got the fact that natural attrition shows no sign of slowing down, AS WELL as enormous racketeering trials, rackets dismantling, warfare in Canada, union oversight, etc. to hasten the family's demise so much that by 1998, the family was - by the feds' own admission - very near death, with a very weak pulse, little sign of recovery, etc. And by 2006, the chart shows that their members had decreased more, and the Niagara Falls article explains that the "chart" itself is very disorganized. Big admin, lots of capos, but very few actual soldiers.
Originally Posted by BensonHURST
On the other hand the family could still also be intact On a much smaller scale.
Get it
Dead from where it was But alive
Understand? Both sides can be correct.
Here's the thing. If the family went from 45 made men in 1990 to, say, 30 men by today, that would imply that the family has - for the most part - gone AGAINST the years of natural attrition from 1960-1990. Which makes no sense when you look at how disastrous the 1990s were for the family.
Originally Posted by BensonHURST
That's my crazy theory and I stated numerous times that the traditional rackets in Buffalo are probably dead or severely diminished.
That I thought the drug pipeline was still viable that it was carves out before prohibition and Buffalo was/is the gate keeper.
I don't see them just giving that up.
In my humble opinion, I don't see how a group of geriatric gangsters with (most likely) little, if any, "muscle" behind them anymore could feasibly hold on to such a pipeline and protect it against outside forces. North of the border we see that the Buffalo gangsters didn't really stand a chance against the smaller, but more violent, Musitano clan. So how do you propose they could hold on to such a pipeline? That's a legitimate question - no flaming, no BS.
Originally Posted by BensonHURST
And that family probably does not have a formal LCNn structure that they probably adapted something similar to the Rizzuto's in strucrure.
And that the power base would probably reside in Canada.
Those are all my crazy theories
For you to say that the power base resides in Canada would be disregarding the recent article which you are putting so much stock into. The recent article which specifically names Buffalo - the city Mafia, not the "Buffalo crime family that is not based in Buffalo" - as supposedly being in control of things going on in Canada. So if you believe the power base resides in Canada, I don't see how you can use the recent Peter Edwards article as supporting your point.
Originally Posted by BensonHURST
All the while admitting I know nothing about Canada, except for what I hear from here and different news articles that I read.that you posted.
I said what I had to say
It's embarrising I can't believe I let myself get baited into this.
Never again My first and last time.
Thanks Bensonhurst. I haven't been aggravating you or "flaming" you - at least in this post. I hope you see what I've written and reply accordingly.
By the way, here are some burning questions of mine that remain unanswered.
Originally Posted by NickyfromTampa
Why are you ignoring the fact that what this Canadian reporter is saying DIRECTLY CONFLICTS with what Buffalo and NYS Media and the American Federal Government have been saying for years?
It's not that "Canada L.E. is not reliable." But American L.E. and Canadian L.E. are saying two conflicting things. And who is in a position to know more about issues in Buffalo? American L.E.
Originally Posted by NickyfromTampa
Which sons and associates have been locked up in recent years, Bensonhurst? Are you talking about the Violis?
