Fletcher, I believe that the original speech indicated that this would be an reaction to any future attempt by 303, IF they ever decide to cause problem, they all would be targeted due to the close relationship they had to each other and that they all would be aware of rogue action.

BUT I am still awaiting a clarification about the last part of that speech:

...take action against ... anyone they even once viewed as a potential friend.

Since the majority of these who "were once viewed as potential friends by 303" have perished, does this mean that the bloodlines of those people will be targeted simply because their ancestors were once on friendly term with 303?

It's a very dangerous path to walk when a current member of a bloodline will be found guilty until proven innocent, simply based on past ancestors assumed dealings with a group that controlled the six cities.

"Sorry that you have to die but one of your ancestors were once viewed as potential friend of terrorists and therefore you are being held accountable for the actions of those people ... we can't prove that your grandmother or father were actually friend, we just assume that."

Alas Obscure that's the way of the world, specifically our world. Those in power really don't need a reason to kill you, if that's what they feel needs to be done. As has been reiterated time and time and time and time again, if you have no dealings with these people, if you are loyal to your family, and if you pass on anything you may know, then you have nothing, and the Rock means nothing to fear.

However, if you are more loyal to your friends, than you are to your family, you may find yourself waking up on the bottom of the Hudson bay with some not so trendy new foot wear. As has again reiterated by Kelly_Kapowski, the GF council are playing things close to their chests, and I doubt you will get any further clarification.

Your life hear is not covered by the United States constitution. You do not have the right to be innocent until proven guilty. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat does not apply. You don't even get to live by the balance of probabilities. Most people will be assumed to be guilty, after all, you are a criminal. It is up to the individual to prove his innocence, to prove his loyalty and to prove his right to a free life, just as its up to Barry to prove he doesn't have a 33lb head.
 

can you tell me the difference between bloodlining and familial vendetta's?

if one line of people is sworn against another line of people (hatfield & mccoy's for example) is that bloodlining or a familial vendetta?

the distinction must be clarified because that is a lot of what is going on is familial vendetta's

Bogie called Prince William aside, put his arm on his new friend's shoulder and said, "Walk with me pal and let me try to answer that if you are seriously wanting an answer."

"When everybody in one family hates everybody in another family and vice versa, you got yourself a family feud, see? That doesn't compare to bloodlining." The two men continued to walk on as Bogie expounded.

"Bloodlining is where everybody in the world pays attention to the son or the daughter of a person who did serious evil here. And if you think about it, it all makes sense. It's like the soul of the father might present itself in the son who then sets about to do the same kind of evil all over again."

Bogie threw down his smoke and crushed it out with the toe of his highly polished shoe. "Think about it, pal. The shit apple doesn't fall too far from the shit tree." Bogie chuckled and gave his pal a friendly slap on the back before walking away. "See you back at headquarters," he called over his shoulder as he made his way across the street.

Wording is key. It seems contradictions were stated from the last paragraph of the speech.

Take that as you will but believe me, the next time one of ours is blood lined, watch how the leadership in our world come together and take action against those we know to be responsible, their friends and anyone they even once viewed as a potential friend

This was a statement (there's no open interpretation for this, it's spelled out plain and simple.) stating mass bloodlining would occur to those involved and those who had no fucking clue what was going on simply because they know someone. This isn't a family feud, it's paranoia.

You can't put enough roses on this shit to hide the stink people.

A good old fashioned "backtrack" is in order.

to those stating they'll defend their family against anyone attacking. That's good, as will I. Although, what makes you think people won't take equally aggressive actions to defend their actual blood? Should they sit idly by and wait to be shot for the actions of others? Seems like the answer is obvious, wouldn't you agree?

We live  this life according to the connections we forge. Throughout the history of our thing we have numerous Leaders who enjoyed long and happy lives not because of their iron fist or their immense cannon, but because of their unbreakable friendships. On the other side of the spectrum, we've seen leaders fall. Not because they were incompetent or even because they personally made even a single mistake; perhaps they were just friendly with the wrong peer at the wrong time, or because a single member of theirs fucked up.

The society we model ourselves on was even more draconian in its view of friendship and connection; when you got your button a number of your peers vouched for you with the explicit understanding that if you fucked up, your comrades were fitted for a pine overcoat just the same as you were. Indeed, this is even a policy that's been implemented at various times and with varying degrees of success on these streets of ours.

In the world we live in, appearance is everything. Perception is reality. The events of this new year highlight this more than my words ever could. I think my left hand man put it very neatly when he drew reference to the legal framework that exists in this country. Your mere presence here, the fact you have immersed yourself fully into a criminal subculture is a tacit admission that you do not accept this constitution and its laws. They don't apply to you when you rob, extort, blackmail, assault and even kill; and they sure as shit don't apply to you when you want things like a fair trial, or enjoy the principle of the presumption of innocence.

Again, I'll paraphrase somebody who spoke before me. Ms. Kapowski has already stated that the onus is on you (a collective you in this case as this is not solely applicable to you as an individual) to prove your innocence and your trustworthiness, and I've honestly got no idea where the surprise is coming from on this - it's exactly the same as the process in any other event in our way of life. Want access to your family's secret rooms? Earn it. Want a promotion? Prove yourself. Want a family? Work for that shit. There is almost nothing in our way of life that rests on the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty', we work on the opposite. Your trust is always in question and you must continually prove not only your own loyalty, but your own usefulness and that's something true of gangsters right up to Captains and Underbosses.

My perception of events so far, incidentally, is that you're being deliberately obtuse here. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but that's certainly the way it looks. For a start, you have mentioned your friendships on avenue having the potential to get you killed. I can't help but feel that you know this is nonsense, because you're not a foolish man. I would consider my bloodline to have been on friendly terms with the bloodline of several of this group's members over the years. Am I worried about knives coming for me in the night? No, because I'm capable of understanding nuance and thinking logically.

If these idiots insist on blood lining our people, no matter how many chances we give them, then we have little option but to return the favour.

For each one of our people that is killed in this way, we will execute every known standing member or associate of this group, on the spot, without remorse. Every.  Single.  Time.  Until this idiotic and deplorable behaviour ends.

 I suppose if you wanted to interpret this as 'anyone who has ever, at any point in time been friend or in contact with members of this group will die', but you'd be totally wrong, and there's a reason you're the only person making that argument. 

This community is small and at times incestuous. Anybody who can be considered socially active has spoken to everybody else's bloodline, that's just how things are. You've mentioned that your bloodline's last contact with anybody within this group was perhaps over 6 months ago. Again, I do not believe you think this is grounds for death, I believe you're being deliberately obtuse and I'm not sure for what reason. If I'm wrong, and that is genuinely how you interpreted Ms. Kapowski's statement then I would retract my claim of your obtuseness, and replace it with the claim that you are displaying crushing naivete.

As far as I'm concerned there's only really three ways to respond to this statement.

• I'm fucked.
• I definitely didn't do anything wrong but I'm worried I might be in the crosshairs
• I didn't do anything wrong and I'm not worried in the slightest.

Which simplifies the problem greatly, really. If anyone's response falls into that tricky middle section that might be a difficult area to navigate then I would advise them to do the following. Confront the problem and talk to your CL. Work hard to prove your loyalty. Go above and beyond what is strictly necessary for the cause of your family and your district. Y'know, just the sort of basic things any associate worth their salt would be doing anyway.

Many apologies, I have sampled some delightful new produce coming in from my native Latin America and it's left with a temporary, albeit irritating, tendency to close my mouth and walk away before I'm actually finished speaking; and there are a couple of other points I wanted to discuss before I took my leave for a well earned rest in a dark room.

First, Ms. Kapowski's closing statement

"the next time one of ours is blood lined, watch how the leadership in our world come together and take action against those we know to be responsible, their friends and anyone they even once viewed as a potential friend."

Again, I must press the point to anyone listening to this speech that if you believe that part about 'potential friends' being applicable to you, then you aren't doing enough. Speaking as a Leader, I would be loathe to have anyone within my HQ who were worried that this applied to them for one simple reason; if you are genuinely concerned the fact your bloodline once had a relationship with somebody will supercede the work you yourself have done in this life, you are worthless to me.

The associates I want under me are ones who have faith in themselves, and confidence that they have done enough to prove themselves to me. If they cannot do then what use do I have for them? It is the people who's loyalty is in question that have the most to lose from this pronouncement; but even if this pronouncement was never made, those without loyalty tend to have a very poor life expectancy, anyway.

Lastly, and this is related to my previous point, this is not bloodlining by any definition of the word. If your grandfather's grandfather fucked up and you are so incompetent that you cannot overcome that, it's not your grandfather's grandfather's actions that got you killed, it's yourself. That's a pretty simple concept in my book.

It's not about proving themselves and having faith in their own abilities. The associate wouldn't be have any cause to be worried if there wasn'ta Godfather rambling in the streets about killing:

(...) their friends and anyone they even once viewed as a potential friend.

Yes, I would be worried, since it has been publicly announced that this is the stance of the entire leadership. I quote:

(...) watch how the leadership in our world come together and take action against those we know to be responsible, their friends and anyone they even once viewed as a potential friend. 

Again, if someone's ability and achievements in this life are so mediocre that they are unable to overshadow a friendship that their bloodline occurred lifetimes ago, then why would any leader want them in their family anyway?

Baffling.

Wait what? Now it is the fault of the associate that they were 'once viewed as a potential' friend by someone from the 303? 

It's not about his abilities or achievements when a Godfather claims in the streets to be willing and happy to kill someone once being a possible friend of the bloodliners.

Baffling.

For sometime now Lancelot had been listening to the reactions of Godmother Kelly's speech, he listened intently to the input of some and to the concerns of others, making his way to the front of the crowd he turns clears his throat and motions for silence..

"Whilst I can see where there would be some confusion here let me point one thing out from the start, my father Vincenzo worked in New york alongside certain members of the 303 group hell he was even a hand to Amethyst for a short time, so as you can see there is historically some sort of connection there this I will not deny, do I feel threatened by this speech? of course I don't as my father never did anything untoward, If as some have pointed out everyone will be killed for mere association then why the hell am I still breathing? and why did godmother Kelly give her blessing for me to run my own crew?" Lancelot pauses for a few moments to let what he had just said sink in, lighting a fat Jamaican special he eyed the crowd once more.

"Many people will interpret this speech in many different ways, let me clear a few things up provided people stick to our way of living and stick to an accepted moral code where is the problem? none of the leaders want to needlessly go out and gun down innocent people after all it is bad for business, saying that all leaders reserve the right to protect their families by using whatever means at their disposal that has never changed, it has always been that way, so my interpretation of this speech is if you attack a crew for no real reason you will feel the backlash tenfold, as with everything any action WILL cause a reaction, but rest assured if you toe line you have nothing to worry about".

Now this is where lines get blurred. We all know that we all have a life away from mafia. A life where bygones should be bygones and the daily shootings and murders are nowhere to be seen. Now we have always had a firm line in the sand that things that go on in this life, be it friends, relationships, falling outs and other such things, it should not transcend to this alternative life.  I fear that this line may be crossed with regards to this. People may scoff at this, but I do not, and never will have this life of mine dictate who I am friends and who I am not friends with in my alternative life.

To cut it short, does this transcend into our alternative lives, if so it shouldn't. I can easily explain why if people really don't know why I think this, but I fear I may contract OOCisitis.

Clouseau, don't be ridiculous. Nobody cares what you do in your "alternative life". You can befriend a giraffe for all I or anyone else cares. 

You say we are being paranoid Barqs yet the only paranoia I see here is coming from you.  All we have laid out is a response, which, if we are being honest has been a long time coming, to the abhorrent blood lining that has been going on for weeks if not months.

I was under the impression that I had nipped this in the bud when I told you exactly how to approach this thing of ours but you have either ignored me or are just too stupid to understand what I said.  I wont repeat myself, the notice I stuck up is still hanging, albeit a little tattered, over there.

Kelly points towards the note hanging from the public information board...........

I am not sure what you are trying to achieve here, I see 4 people that have taken my little speech a little too much to heart, one of them now lies next to his forefathers in the cemetery, would you like to be the next one?  After all, paranoia is bad for business you know?  It might also be worth noting that had your ancestors made the efforts in speaking (you can see a transcript of your muteness HERE) that you seem to be making now on our streets then maybe they would still be around, sadly, this was simply not the case.   

I am not sure what you are trying to achieve here, I see 4 people that have taken my little speech a little too much to heart, one of them now lies next to his forefathers in the cemetery, would you like to be the next one?  After all, paranoia is bad for business you know?  It might also be worth noting that had your ancestors made the efforts in speaking (you can see a transcript of your muteness HERE) that you seem to be making now on our streets then maybe they would still be around, sadly, this was simply not the case.   

What does that have to do with anything? The person you were (I even asked you, silly me!) referencing to did indeed contribute to this information and is now lying a few feet under. Did it have to do with this discussion? Nope.

And I see you're digging up people's ancestors now, which again, doesn't really contribute anything to this little discussion.

I am not sure what you are trying to achieve here, I see 4 people that have taken my little speech a little too much to heart, one of them now lies next to his forefathers in the cemetery, would you like to be the next one?

It has everything to do with anything.

I was asking Barqs if he wanted to meet the same fate.  You know, a question, relevent to the current conversation.  If you had listened just a little more closely I also stated that paranoia is bad for business a little before I asked the question thus enforcing my asking of the question. 

Did I state that it was a result of this conversation that your ancestor is lying 6 feet under, no, I thought not, that seems to be an assumption you have plucked out of thin air, so well done for that.  I merely stated he was lying 6 feet under, a statement of FACT.  If nothing else though it is quite pleasing to me that your somewhat limited intellect is indeed ticking over, albeit somewhat slowly.

I get the feeling he's clutching at straws a little bit right now Primarch, fairly amusing indeed. 

I was also under the impression that one of the four (am I the 5th now?) that have "taken your speech a little to heart" actually requested his death rather than it being as a result of your super scary demeanour here oh great Godfather Kelly_Kapowski. I think the most amusing part of this speech is the irony in which you talk about other fallen mobsters supposed idiocy displayed in the streets. 

Just for clarification though. You plan to stop bloodlining..by bloodlining? Have I understood this correctly? Shining example set down by one of the beacons and forefront leaders of the community. Luckily I have spoken with my Godfather about this issue and have been reassured that so long as I keep my nose clean and work hard for her and her district, I won't have to keep looking over my shoulder in fear of rules enforced by Godfathers outside of her domain, granted our conversation was prior to this announcement so perhaps she has changed her thinking - I sincerely hope not though since I her ability to go above and beyond for her members one of her most redeeming characteristics that few others can shine a light too.

Shingo nods respectfully and bows back into the shadows. 

Then, what does the fact that he is lying six feet under have anything to do with Barqs and indeed with this conversation? Why even bring it up?

Because this:

I am not sure what you are trying to achieve here, I see 4 people that have taken my little speech a little too much to heart, one of them now lies next to his forefathers in the cemetery, would you like to be the next one?

Makes it pretty much sound that someone was killed for contributing to the discussion, and that you threaten to kill Barqs. And I don't think that you (of all people) judging others for their oh so limited intellect is contributing to this discussion either.