Also Bensonhurst, you are still continuing to ignore this point I have made time and time again:




Also, Bensonhurst, in a direct response to one of your statements, I asked this:


And also you did not reply to the whole point about Ron Fino I made - i.e., asking him about the Buffalo mob today would be akin to asking Sammy Gravano about the Gambino mob today since they both flipped in 1990.

I looked at the birth days of the Buffalo Family members chart from 2006 (previous page) Look at the birth dates. 1910, 1926, almost all born before 1930. I don't see them being that active, if any are even alive.

Definitely not. They had 45 members by 1990, and that was before the federal government hastened their demise with RICO prosecutions and union oversight. 45 members was a huge downturn from decades before, implying that they weren't even keeping up with new inductions back in the 1980s, let alone the 2000s.

Nikel said everything that had to he said about Fino.

Early on you listed Fino as a credible source than when someone pointed that Fino said they were active.

You flipped the script and said he was outted as a liar.

Then he had no way of knowing what's going on today.

You see you change your story.

How is he any less credible than any other cooperating witness they are all liars
????

Because what he says does not align with ur opinion nobody should listen to him??

You see what you do?

Yet if Fino would have just said they were dead than he would be the most reliable source because he was high up in the union right?

So he should know what was happening when he first flipped and shortly thereafter

Thats what you do.

You change ur story

You are explaining Fino away

I used to give you the benefit of the doubt, Bensonhurst, but this is a bold faced lie and I'm sure you know it.

Back in April of this year, myself, Rooster, and others debated Fino. There were articles, and even his own book, from as late as 2012 in which he stated he believed the family was still active. But, due to his collaboration and statements in Dan Herbeck's 2017 article, it became obvious that - by 2017 - he viewed the Buffalo mob as having only mere remnants left. Remnants meaning, by the tone of the article, that there was barely anything, if anything at all, in terms of structure or hierarchy or whatever.

So, back in April, Fino seemed to agree with my summation that the Buffalo mob was dead in terms of structure, rackets, and a viable criminal organization.
Notice that I still questioned his validity. Specifically, on April 9, 2018, I said:
"Ron Fino flipped in 1989. After that he really has no inside knowledge on the union. Not saying that throws away his credibility, but just bear that in mind when reading his information."

Later on is when Fino began saying the Buffalo mob was still active. AFTER he said there was nothing left other than remnants. And, when that information came out, I continued to say what I've been saying this whole time - Fino is an educated guy, he knows a lot about the Mafia in Buffalo; but in terms of "inside knowledge" past 1989/1990, he really has no leg to stand on.


In closing, Bensonhurst, quit talking out of your ass.


So, back to my still unanswered questions. I should note by now that this is the third time I've asked these two things.

Can someone post the full chart?

This is the 2006 chart obtained by FOIA request about a month ago. Empties are redactions by the FBI because these members are still alive. Wish they would have sent me the full chart.

Only still alive ? Or maybe without criminal record too ?

"
(b)(6) personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;

(b)(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information ( A ) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, ( B ) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, ( C ) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, ( D ) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation, or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, ( E ) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or ( F ) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual;"

Normally FBI much more revealing with Mob names or am I wrong?

No, not because they are still alive - I told you this Nickle. The FBI more than likely does not know they are dead. You can have a look at their "Dead List" if you want, they don't update it unless (generally) someone notifies the FBI that the person is dead and provides proof with an obituary or something.

Buffalo is as dead as Stevie Wonder. There's nothing there. NOTHING! I wish this thread was closed.

Just going on what the FBI indicated in the material... Not trying to flame you Nicky.

Stevie Wonder is dead?????

Regarding this thread - it's on thin ice. Nicky uses it to flame anyone who doesn't like the way he crosses his t's and dots his i's. He just doesn't know how to act with adults.

Make not much sense to me. If the FBI does not know if they are dead, it would be rather unbelievable that they overlook the OC scene.

FBI tolds b6&b7c as reason.

" ( C ) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy," Sounds like this guys had no RICO or Mob conviction for me.

So asking Giacomo for "reports" he claims to have is offensive.
And asking Bensonhurst for a proper response to questions is offensive.
Ok, sure.

Oh, stop trying to appear so innocent. Everyone knows your sole purpose on posting here is to be a disruptive influence and to flame others.

Thanks, I forgot to point that part out as well...

Read through my posts and find me an occasion where I ever made up bullshit, made up facts, or said explanations that weren't reasonable or fair. You do that and I promise I'll sit down and concede I'm wrong.

Stevie Wonder's still living...just enough... for the city...

😝 😂

Nicky,

All I stated from day one was my opinion.

I am not exactly sure how I can be wrong since its all mine.

I am not sure how or why you think your opinion is the only right one.

I come here for my own reasons to me it is interesting to interact with other people from other parts of the country that grew up all around this like I did.

I enjoy hearing the stories.

It is also interesting how many guys in here are able to do such thorough research and find out all these facts WIRE TAPS, COPIES OF INDICTMENTS, FOIA
really interesting.

I have no desire to argue with you it's really stupid

I have to tell you it's like you try to bully people who have a different opinion and make them feel stupid.

Maybe you don't realize it???

I think it really turns people off and thats why they complain.

I think your perspective is very valid based on facts and I think looking at different sides makes the thread interesting.

You get to look at both sides and see which one makes sense to you.

I tried going back and forth with you with respect but you just want to make it a mud slinging contest.

I even point blank asked you to be a gentleman about disagreeing.

I am done going back and forth with you about this.

Because your opinion is based on facts which are plain wrong. For instance, you noted how if the Buffalo Mafia took a HUGE hit going down from say 100 active guys to 30
They still can be viable at 30.
Despite the fact that they had only 45 members in 1990 - and that was before the "big hit" - i.e. RICO, federal investigations, union oversight.

You see, that 45 members thing is not "opinion" - it is documented fact published in the Buffalo News in 1990.


Well, for one, my opinion is based on fact - dare I say it, yours is not.


If you remember correctly, you were the one who started being rude to me in the Bufalino thread - "little girl" insults and similar instances of you simply brushing off any actual facts.


No, you didn't.


You can disagree like gentleman and still discuss conflicting opinions. But in your case, my complaint with you is that you tend to state your theories about how the Buffalo Mafia could still be active, and these theories are often based on inaccuracies (i.e. the 100 members thing) or have enormous holes in them. And when somebody calls you out on your theories, you get upset because "It's just my opinion/theory, don't belittle me."
So what am I supposed to do? You're completely OK to have an opinion, but if your opinion is based on inaccuracies or enormous holes, you can't expect people not to correct you or call you out. Because otherwise people that don't know much about the Buffalo Mafia could look at that opinion/theory of yours and say "Wow, yeah, that's plausible, I'm sure that's the case" even though the theory itself isn't valid for various reasons.

When you enter a debate with a "theory" or "opinion" of what's really the case, you need to be open to the fact that people will disagree with your opinion. And in some cases you can defend your stance, but in other cases you just have to say "Ok, you're right, my theory can't be valid because of ____." If you think you're being bullied because somebody says your theory is wrong, then that's more of a reflection of you than it is of anyone else.

It's not your facts. But God forbid someone says something contrary to what you say. You become a major pain-in-the-ass, crybaby who ends up disrupting the boards while flaming others.

Nicky,

Someone calls me out?
You...

Me get upset
Really?

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.


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.


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.


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.



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.

I just explained where and how the 100 made men came from.

It is from the article about Buffalo is all but dead.
Why are you NOT accepting my answer?

See what's happening here you don't like my answer so ur not accepting it.

This is what S.C. is talking about flaming.
I think.

--_______________________________________________
The pipeline.....

This is new?

So another family is in control of Buffalo in Buffalo?

You never said that before?

Why the change of heart?

----------------------!!!!! See what I mean changing ur story?

What you have been saying and L.E. and media is that there are remnants still in place.

So you now don't believe the remnants are In place?

You believe another family kicked what was left of Buffalo out because they were too weak and
Took control of the pipeline and territory
????

That's what r saying
?

That's a new one
?

This sounds like a theory?

You just said your opinions are based on fact like L.E.and and reputable media.

Show me?

See my problem here your not consistent with your last few posts.

Facts vs Theory
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not really understanding your question?

About what L.E. here conflicting with Canada.

Let me remind you that the Buffalo field office was conflicting with the field office that that was involved in the Violi bust.

I don't remember which it is but this was spoken about on the forum in detail.

One FBI and 2 different positions on Buffalo
_____________________________________________

I can go on about the indictments but I tho k enough is enough

I think this is aggravating other members so I don't want to continue

Nikel knows way more than me.

He can certainly give you the info you want

There's no way an lcn outfit will let a Canadian be boss and be stationed in Canada, all of the Canadian names that's mentioned lives in Canada to my knowledge and not buffalo. Articles have said the traditional lcn rackets is in Buffalo. There was a guy that went by the name "the arm" that was on these boards a few years ago and he argued that not only the buffalo family existed but they was thriving, and people bashed him. I personally believe that the buffalo family exist with a traditional hierarchy, until I'm proven wrong that's what I will stick to, no debate!

From what I can remember "The Arm" was mostly bashed because he claimed he used to be involved in mob wars as a street soldier and most of his stories came across as if he was using the board to play an RPG game.

I never read those posts, the posts I read was when he was breaking down the buffalo family and names, I remember he said todaro grandson or something have alot of influence in that area, and I wouldn't be surprised if mob actually soldiers posted on these boards

I just read an article that the whole Ontario/Hamilton was under Buffalo, than the Mustiano's came into town and aligned with the Rizzuto's.

The Rizzuto's, had a beef with the two Hamilton family because they borrowed $7MM from him and didn't pay him back.

That was the reason Papilia and Barillo got whacked.

After that the factions were never than taken over by Rizzuto so they were left alone.

They must have made peace with the Mustiano's for as long as they had to.

Because it's not accurate. They havent had 100 soldiers at any point in the recent past.


And vice versa.


You've lost me.


I didn't say that at all. Read the post again. Stop flaming.

There are most likely still various remnants in place. I have said this before. I have never said anything otherwise. Stop lying, and stop flaming.

But the pipeline is a different story. I simply asked - without flaming - how a small group of elderly men could feasibly hold and protect a multimillion-dollar drug pipeline. Other organized crime groups, Italian or otherwise, would inevitably want a piece of that pie. And there are far more violent organized crime groups elsewhere in Canada and even in NYS.

So stop flaming and putting words in my mouth.


Not sure what you're asking me here? It seems you're just trying to incite an argument. What, in particular, do you want me to "prove?" I've never lied or misrepresented information, or made up bullshit like a variety of posters in this Buffalo argument.


What? If you could find that thread you are talking about that would be great because I can't really make sense of this post.



But you're the one spouting the information. You're also the one with the theories, which you should be able to back up if questioned. You're the one misrepresenting and calling out the things I'm saying. You should be able to back up YOUR point, as opposed to putting it on another poster.