Mounting Chaos


Before Las Vegas Police unveiled the latest “narrative change” during a Monday press conference, it was believed that Campos had been shot after the rampage, not before.

With this news, we have learned that the police investigation has descended into chaos. Or perhaps that it hasn’t even started. They seem not to have managed to even put together a timeline of recorded events, of who did what when. Isn’t doing that part of Law Enforcement 101? What’s going on?

One clue (and we’re now looking for clues about what’s gone wrong with the investigation) might be the presence of the FBI as well as the Las Vegas police chief at press conferences: there are multiple agencies involved. And since many of these agencies seem to be rivals, perhaps what we’re seeing is a power struggle going on within the investigation, with the police chief being overruled by the FBI, and the investigation has become log-jammed with countermanding instructions emanating from various sources.

In fact, it may also be a microcosm of what some people are saying is a civil war that has broken out inside the US government since the election of Donald Trump. That’s to say that the chaos in Las Vegas is a manifestation of the same chaos throughout the US government, as pro-Trump government agents (and politicians) battle with anti-Trump government agents (and politicians). Every time Trump tries to get something done, he gets thwarted by someone or other, somewhere or other.

It’s a civil war that’s also being conducted in the mainstream media with non-stop ferocious attacks being launched on Trump. There seem to be a lot of people who want to see the 2016 presidential election declared null and void, or Trump impeached, or maybe even assassinated. And it’s a civil war which has spilled onto the streets with Antifa.

But it’s not just in the USA that there is mounting chaos. There’s also mounting political chaos in Europe. It started with the Brexit vote, and now sees the UK and EU log-jammed in deadlocked negotiations. And we’re seeing it in Spain, with the Catalonian government in collision with the the Spanish government. And Hungary. And Poland.

In fact, the whole world seems to be becoming gradually more and more chaotic. The Middle East has been in chaos ever since the Iraq war in 2003. In some ways, Islamic migration and terrorism have simply been exporting that chaos to Europe. Maybe the current Korean crisis is simply another manifestation of mounting global chaos?

Perhaps this is how wars start? Not when rational leaders and governments make cool, clear-eyed decisions, but when chaotic forces are unleashed,  pushing and pulling all concerned into head-on collision or close alliance. They are perhaps more like periodic volcanic eruptions than anything else: for decades, even centuries, the volcano sleeps, and the land around it is stable – but then one day, as a result of chaotic forces working deep beneath it, it erupts, and the landscape around it changes forever, as trees are blown away or covered in ash, rivers diverted, lakes filled or newly created.

In most histories of WW1, the major players are regarded as being the political leaders of the countries involved – Kaiser Wilhelm II, Franz Joseph, Tsar Nicholas, H. H. Asquith, Raymond Poincaré, Woodrow Wilson, Mehmed V, etc -. It’s believed that it’s the decisions made by these people that created and shaped the conflict. But weren’t all these people responding to unfolding events? And wasn’t one of those events the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo by Gavrilo Princip on 28 June 1914? Didn’t this set off a chain reaction of subsequent events, like a row of falling dominoes colliding with one another? Weren’t the supposed ‘leaders’ as helplessly caught up in the unfolding events as anyone else? In fact, weren’t they far more deeply caught up in events than more or less everyone else? Weren’t the telegraph wires in all the seats of government running red hot as the crisis developed? Did any of these leaders get any sleep? Within exactly one month of 28 June 1914, WW1 had broken out, and the world had changed completely. Did any of the ‘leaders’ plan or agree or foresee any such thing? I very much doubt any of them did.

July 1914 was almost certainly a period of chaos during which all concerned were being pushed and pulled and tugged and threatened and pleaded with, all day every day. All concerned were probably getting one hundred different rival opinions every day, maybe every hour.

And we seem to be living through a similar time of chaos right now. Donald Trump is being assailed from all sides by very heated, rival opinions of every kind. And so is Theresa May. And so is Mariano Rajoy. And no doubt Jean-Claude Juncker, and Angela Merkel, and Vladimir Putin as well. There is nobody ‘in control’ of anything, except their own small sphere of influence. Events are simply unfolding, and all are helplessly caught up in it the eddy.

And now that we have learned that the shooting started inside the Mandalay Bay Hotel before bullets began to rain down on the concert outside, rather than after, as we had hitherto been led to believe, then might it not be that the mass slaughter was a consequence of the events unfolding inside the hotel.

Paddock fired more than 200 bullets into the hall and nearby rooms at the beginning of his deadly rampage on Oct. 1.

This sounds like gang warfare had broken out inside the hotel, with multiple rounds being fired along its corridors. There have also been reports of shooting taking place at other hotels – e.g. the Bellagio. Maybe the mass killings were simply the collateral damage of gang warfare? Maybe Stephen Paddock didn’t plan anything at all that night. Maybe he just got caught up in chaotic, rapidly unfolding events.

About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to Mounting Chaos

  1. Smoking Lamp says:

    Frank, Off Topic: They are looking to garner support to ban smoking at beaches in the UK again. See “Thailand has banned smoking on its beaches – should Britain do the same?” at the Telegraph. There is a poll.

    • Tony says:

      I voted on the poll but appeared to be the only voter.
      I think I saw somewhere that a beach ban in California has just been reversed.

        • beobrigitte says:

          In a veto message, he writes, “if people can’t smoke even on a deserted beach, where can they? There must be some limit to the coercive power of government.”
          One bill would’ve imposed a $100 fine for people caught smoking tobacco, marijuana, or even electronic cigarettes.

          Wasn’t the only reason the smoking ban was dictated the indoor-oh-so-deadly-passive-smoke?
          It’s time we point out how it come that there are smoking bans in the first place.

          At least there is one Governor somewhere who appears to have some common sense left.

      • nisakiman says:

        I’ve given up on voting in Daily Telegraph polls, because I always get the same as you – that 100% agree with me, unsurprisingly, since I seem to be the only one who has voted. There’s a glitch somewhere, and I’m not sure where. I thought maybe it was my anti-adware, but disabling it made no difference.

    • nisakiman says:

      I wrote about the Thailand beach smoking ban just a little bit earlier today, funnily enough. But the Thai reason is not, ostensibly, to ban smoking per se, but to address the supposed problem of discarded cigarette butts polluting the sea and shoreline.

      • beobrigitte says:

        Nisakiman, great! I’ve followed the link ‘Thailand beach smoking ban’ and was amazed about the amount of “cigarette butts” ?hidden underneath all the other tourist rubbish left on beaches there.

        What REALLY gets to me is that there is no social security in Thailand, people there don’t get help from the state and survival can be difficult.
        The anti-smokers don’t care. They want smokers and especially the tobacco industry gone. End of. “All the non-smokers who didn’t visit Thailand before will turn up.”
        What if Thailand suffers the fate of our pubs?

    • waltc says:

      As of 4 PM US east time, 29 votes total and we’re ahead by only 9 pts at 54%

    • jaxthefirst says:

      Can’t see the poll at all. Perhaps they’ve taken it down …

  2. Tony says:

    Sorry. Way off topic.
    I came across this today:
    “Further anti-business measures to be imposed by the Commission
    The tobacco industry’s smaller companies are facing worrying developments in the implementation of new anti-business measures drawn up by the European commission. The latest attack on small businesses can be seen in the new Track & Trace regulation.
    Bill Etheridge MEP said “The regulation in its current form will impact the few remaining manufacturers in the UK (4 micro to small family-owned companies manufacturing and distributing nasal snuff, pipe tobacco and other traditional products). Although well intentioned, sadly the regulation will fail to stop illegal tobacco from East Europe and will only obstruct legal producers/distributors.”

    I knew nothing about this so tried a Google search. It seems there was a ‘public consultation’ that ended last year:
    I look a quick look at 3 of the 23 “‘consumer” responses. One was from a non-smoker who commented that tobacco harmed public health etc. Others just selected options for or against various EU controls of distribution and tracking. Presumably all would be expensive. The response of consumer #8 contained the following comment which I suspect sums up the whole sorry business:
    In Germany we already established a system of securing securing tobacco products. It works perfectly since centuries and customers are happy about it. Tracking single packages will not add any benefits. They will cause significant cost. They will cause companies to go out of business. They will cause monopoly in the EU of Non-EU companies. Governments will loose money on tobacco taxes, VAT and profit taxes. Customers will not profit. By regulating products that are legally on the market controlled by local authorities it is NEVER possible to protect against illegal products!
    Products that are brought illegally to the EU don’t care for regulations and can sold for lower prices than regulated products.”

    I have to admit that I have no idea whether this is very bad or just bad. According to Bill Etheridge the EU appear to be exceeding even the extreme powers they got through the TPD.

    • beobrigitte says:

      Governments will loose money on tobacco taxes, VAT and profit taxes. Customers will not profit. By regulating products that are legally on the market controlled by local authorities it is NEVER possible to protect against illegal products!

      When will Governments learn that they fell victim to obsessed fanatics who don’t care for anything else other than their goal?

      Sometimes I wish they’d get what they want. The anti-smoking nonsense would go up in flames much sooner than we think. Angry people and protest voters we already have.

  3. beobrigitte says:

    Totally O/T

    For Frank.

    When are we having that Party mentioned a while ago in the Pub? This weekend?

  4. waltc says:

    OT and H/T Chris Sarochin: Harvey Weinstein praised for protecting youth from smoke.

  5. smokingscot says:


    Israel and the USA will quit with UNESCO. Basically because they feel it’s been hijacked by people who no longer stick to the core principles of the agency – oh and they don’t much like them either.

    Having got that one settled, perhaps they can start getting serious about leaving a pile of other supranational bodies, with the WHO and the World Bank way up there in the justification stakes.

  6. beobrigitte says:

    Bob, Harvey Weinstein join anti-smoking battle
    Updated 10/24/2006 5:54 PM ET …

    …”As a former smoker, I feel like it’s my responsibility to do everything I can to educate young people about the dangers of smoking,” movie mogul Harvey Weinstein said.
    That was in 2006.

    In 2017 Mr. Harvey Weinstein has new problems.

    I take it, the anti-smokers don’t mind?

  7. Rose says:

    From the Telegraph article

    “One cigarette butt in a litre of water can make it toxic enough to kill fish, according to public health charity Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)”

    “Short-term bioassays (48 hours) using the water flea as the test organism were conducted. The results indicate that the chemicals released into freshwater environments from cigarette butts are lethal to Daphnia at concentrations of 0.125 cigarette butts per liter (one butt per two gallons of water).”

    Reminds me of the plastic bag tax that Tony was talking about at Grandad’s

    Series of Blunders Turned the Plastic Bag into Global Villain – Times
    March 8, 2008

    “Scientists and environmentalists have attacked a global campaign to ban plastic bags which they say is based on flawed science and exaggerated claims.
    Scientists and environmentalists have attacked a global campaign to ban plastic bags which they say is based on flawed science and exaggerated claims.”

    “Gordon Brown announced last month that he would force supermarkets to charge for the bags, saying that they were “one of the most visible symbols of environmental waste”. Retailers and some pressure groups, including the Campaign to Protect Rural England, threw their support behind him.”

    “The central claim of campaigners is that the bags kill more than 100,000 marine mammals and one million seabirds every year. However, this figure is based on a misinterpretation of a 1987 Canadian study in Newfoundland, which found that, between 1981 and 1984, more than 100,000 marine mammals, including birds, were killed by discarded nets. The Canadian study did not mention plastic bags.

    Fifteen years later in 2002, when the Australian Government commissioned a report into the effects of plastic bags, its authors misquoted the Newfoundland study, mistakenly attributing the deaths to “plastic bags”.

    The figure was latched on to by conservationists as proof that the bags were kill
    ers. For four years the “typo” remained uncorrected. It was only in 2006 that
    the authors altered the report, replacing “plastic bags” with “plastic debris”. But they admitted: “The actual numbers of animals killed annually by plastic
    bag litter is nearly impossible to determine.”
    In a postscript to the correction they admitted that the original Canadian study had referred to fishing tackle, not plastic debris, as the threat to the marine environment.”
    https: //

    Click to access 22954.pdf

    Incidental catch of marine birds and mammals in fishing nets off Newfoundland, Canada
    http: //

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.