|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 6, 2021 2:02:54 GMT
I love DDA and even if it may appear to take a sympathetic stance to the bank robbers, were they not motivated by all accounts on record? It was an act of desperation, even if Sonny and Sal were thick as two bricks. That just tells us that there are control freaks who are in charge of making and keeping records. I've lived over sixty years, and I've seen it. Facts are deliberately discarded to provide whatever narrative that the mob wants to make, and the mob has been in charge of all the estates, save perhaps some of the clergy and a some of the law, for at least fifty years. There are no "fact checks". All you get is lies to rationalize the hate that the mob has towards the outcast Untouchable families. I don't think DDA made any biased notions of character or judgements. It presented a scenario that got way out of hand. Both Sal and Sonny were presented as hotheads and were 'rightfully' considered dangerous. Neither of them got off and Sal paid the ultimate price. They were still human beings though, just stupid ones and it is not illegal to be an idiot. If it wasn't actually factual, the representation of the bank robbing situation was true. ***edit*** Found this link John Wojowicz
|
|
