I was fascinated to see the 3 most wanted men in the UK on the front page of the newspapers.

Two of them looked the same. I think they are brothers.

But do you really think that if the police knew the identities of the killers they would splash their mug-shots over the front pages? That sort of stuff works well for long-on-the-run criminals whom are thought to be floating around and hopefully getting a little careless.

But police killers? No. Anyone who kills a police-man or woman is not going to hang around in this country for long. If they are part of a gang then the gang will spirit them away in the boot of a car up to a remote part of the welsh or scottish coast, and then on in a trawler somewhere to safety.

Printing their mug shots is silly. That will simply increase the safety measures that are being taken to keep them safe.

So either we have :

a)They pictures are real, and now we will never catch them

or

b)The pictures are simply fake, and designed to reassure the public and frighten off future cop-killers.

Someone will be caught. There is a massive manhunt on. Killing a cop is simply not acceptable. Let's hope that justice is done rather the public reassured that the police are in control.

I'm confused.

LONDON (Reuters) - Police have concluded prime suspect Richard Cazaly committed the knife attack on Abigail Witchalls and he would have been charged if he had not killed himself, officials said on Tuesday.

Now this statement from our glorious boys-in-blue says quite clearly that Mr Cazaly committed the knife attack.

It doesn't say he is only a suspect, it actually says he did it.

Now under UK law, folk are INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. The police clearly do not think he is innocent, it looks like they have established a truth that PROVES he is guilty. I'm not sure they are supposed to do this, their job is simply to collect evidence, present it, and occasionally charge people with crimes.

It is the job of the courts to establish guilt (beyond reasonable doubt).

We may find the Barrister-and-Judges union call for a strike on this one, the police have decided to become judge-jury-executioner in this one -- although I will not suggest that they had anything to do in his death.

The problem here is that members of the public will read this and get the wrong impression.

But it gets worse. Far worse...

"This case is solved," Assistant Chief Constable Mark Rowley of Surrey police told a news conference.

"All the available evidence points to Richard Cazaly being the offender."

Now whilst the 2nd statement is good (that's the police doing their job), the first is a little misleading. I suspect Mr Rowley has been taken out of context, and if I were him would complain bitterly to the media who did this. Maybe even threaten charges.

You see the case is NOT SOLVED. It has merely got to the stage where the police feel that they have done enough work to establish a likely suspect, and are not going to look any further.

The CPS -- Crown Prosecution Service see things very differently :

But this is in no sense a declaration that he was guilty of the offence," CPS principal legal adviser Chris Newell added. "Had Mr Cazaly lived, our decision would merely have authorised the police to begin the legal process by charging him."

So we have the bizarre situation of the Police doing the CPS's job of determining guilt, and the CPS clearly stating something else.

Why don't the police get on with their day-job?

Whilst we are on the subject, we can wonder about QE2's constant fretting over the moral breakdown in the country.

She is still the Head of The Law, and the Head of the Church. She can call for a reform of either and both, and do her bit to clean up this country.

If She (and it's not my cat's mother unless I'm in line to the Throne) did this, She would go down as one of the most important monarchs since 1066 (at least).

So come on Queenie, let's put the 'Great' back into Britain.

Let's Jack that flag back up the mast, let's fly the Union Flag proudly from our flagpoles, let's show the World that we Brits can admit we're wrong, and are prepared to make it right.

Two wrongs rarely make a right, but two rights are better than none.

It seems that torches from Argos can threaten Apache Gunships!

This is the world's most advanced attack helicopter gunship. I think you can get a ropey one for about $50M , and need to spend over $100M for something that might look smart and be useful.

But £14.99 in Argos can buy you the ultimate deterrent -- a flashlight!

Farmers in England are fed up with the low flying exercises at night which are worrying their livestock (that's illegal), so they have taken to

---------------------------------------------------Quote
The Times (online) November 18, 2005

Mayday . . . farmers at ten o'clock
A fleet of the Army’s most sophisticated weaponry, the £40 million Apache helicopter, is in danger of being defeated by a band of farmers.

The Ministry of Defence has complained to Dorset police that some of its Apache gunships, which are being prepared at Middle Wallop base, Hampshire, for deployment to Iraq, were put at risk when the farmers shone torches at them on Monday night. The MoD abandoned the exercise.

The farmers are angry at low-flying night exercises, which scare their livestock. Tim Harding, 63, of Long Crichel, Dorset, said: “I have horses and they get frightened. A pony ran off and bolted through an electric fence. It is very lucky it survived. Another farmer has had similar problems with his pigs.”

Major Peter Cripps, an army spokesman, said: “A bright light like that at night is extremely dangerous. The aircraft could have crashed then it would have been manslaughter.”

----------------------------End Quote

Let's hope the Iraqis don't read the Times! And can someone please shoot Major Cripps , he's just shot the Army in the foot, so someone should give him a taste of his own medicine!

They should be grateful to the farmers for finding an operational bug in the Apache Helicopter equipment -- maybe we can sue the American manufacturers and get some of our tax-payer's money back?

Otherwise we'll have to award a £50m contract to a French military contractor (step forward Thales whom are about to be bought by the French) to 'find, fix and neutralise' the night-vision problem.

It just goes to show that 'Military Intelligence' is just as Oxymoronic as 'Happily Married'.

Should the police be armed?

Currently, specialist police units are armed, and the average bobby on the street carries no firearms.

Whilst carrying a 'piece' (to use the east-end slang) increases your ability to defend yourself, it also increases the chances of being shot at.

Most arguments tend to escalate into skirmishes as either side adds fuel to their arguments. Domestic arguments are great examples of this. One half starts off complaining about something minor, and suddenly, last week's mistake is added into the melting pot. Then the other half 'remembers another thing'. The argument rapidly escalates into a nasty child-frightening confrontation between two adults.

Gun fights are little different. Both sides escalate their firepower, and normally the side with the most cannons wins. If you don't get your gun out, there's a good chance the other side won't, and if they already have them on show, there's a good chance they won't use them. But pretend you have superior force (when you don't), and you hugely increase the chance of being shot at.

Sun Tzu's art of war addresses these issues nicely in his first few paragraphs. In a nutshell, DO NOT ENGAGE SUPERIOR FIRE POWER.

Of course if your name is Horatio Nelson, and you can see how to NEUTRALISE the opponent's superior firepower, then you may proceed onwards, and move directly to Trafalgar Square.

So carrying a gun is going to get you into more trouble than if you didn't.

Our armed police currently move around in rather hi-tech vehicles, in groups (normally) of at least four, and if they are even considering engaging the enemy, backup is on its way.

In size.

Ever wondered about those spooky helicopters that hover over London? They guide the cavalry in. This is in general, superior firepower.

To beat these guys, you are going to have to have at least eight (probably more) very highly trained shooters, two phenomenal drivers and possibly your own helicopter gunship. There are very few gangs that can muster this sort of firepower.

So arming the standard Beat-Officer is so unfair. It will further alienate him (or her) from her (or his) community, increase the chance of coming under enemy fire, and also creates an opportunity for opportunistic theft.

Not to mention the massive amount of public money that would need to be spent filling in forms about the guns, accounting for each live round that is issued, each empty case not returned and the training of the staff. This is going to get expensive, and it's not going to solve any problems, it's going to make things worse.

So if you want to pay more tax, see more police get wounded in action and have a less approachable local bobby...

The problem is "TOO MANY GUNS"

The solution is "LESS GUNS"

Simple.

It will not stop police from getting shot at, but it will reduce this. There is no acceptable 'minimum' apart from zero, but sadly there is a residual amount of crime that is always going to persist in a country of 70 million people where wealth is not equally distributed.

Page 54 of the times today (sat 19 2005) shows a photograph of police in riot gear and a riotter...

The caption is

'Police clash with protestors using water cannon in Pusan'

which backs up a story about riotting in Korea.

But examining the photograph shows that the 'water cannon' water is falling in a very wide parabola. This isn't water cannon -- it's a hosepipe!

Further examination of a newswire confirms this -- 'water hose'.

But our wonderful media have 'translated' this into something more sinister.

It makes one wonder about the general standard of reporting.

What is it with the Government and the binge-drinking issue?

It seems that they want a cause-celebre, something to beat the drum about and sell lots of newspapers. Binge drinking has become almost a criminal offence now, and no-one really knows exactly what binge drinking means.

The new scare about increases in Oral cancer are totally out of proportion to the risks.

To quote Kings College London on the issue:

'The total cancer burden is totally dominated by colorectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer and prostate cancer, which combined account for about 50% of the total number of cases. Most other individual diseases are quite rare, occurring in less than 20 cases per 100,000 population per year'

-- Henrik Moeller
-- Director and Professor of Cancer Epidemiology.

So lets apply this to Oral cancer , and a population of 70 million. This would mean around 700x20 = 14000 cases a year. In fact, Mouth Cancer Awareness Week is quoting a figure of 4,400 new cases a year.

Whilst alcohol is a social problem, it also has a tremendous role to play in society. It provides an escape, a means to unwind, a way to continue in a highly stressful world. Letting alcohol take charge of one's life is not so good, but enjoying its pleasures in moderation is actually quite beneficial.

Forced to choose between boredom and alcoholism, I would always pick the drink.

Euston station is advertising £20 return tickets to Birmingham -- the Black Country.

This is a saving of over £14 -- as long as you catch the right train.

But that's the catch: It takes over 3 hours, AND you have to change at Northampton.

Great advertising for Silverline Trains.

Is there an exemption for London Cabbies not to wear seat-belts?

Has anyone looked closely at the cabbies as they drive past? Why don't the police pull them over?

If we cannot enforce the simplest of our laws, we will never crack this terrorism thing.

Somewhere on the west-bound central line tube platform is a little door.

Somewhere on that little door is a little sign.

The little sign reads :

'Beware when opening door -- there is a heavy bar that may fall on you'

I tried the little handle on the little door and it was going to open -- my fellow passengers rightly thought this was a little (a lot?) foolhardy so I stopped. But someone who doesn't understand English (step forward 10% of our population) might have a dissapointing experience here.

The little handle on the little door was about 2 1/2 feet off the ground, just right for a little child to open the little door with a little hand.

Surely this is a health and safety issue ? Surely if this was a private company , all sorts of warnings and fines would have been issued.

But clearly, LRT Blonde-Controllers do not worry about public safety at Bond Street.

If they could do the simple stuff , then they might (emphasis on might) have a chance at stopping folk blow themselves up.

But let's do the simple stuff first and build some skills.

I am horrified by the Sun headline above.

The entirety of the newspapers front page was taken up with this, not news, but an opinion, taken out of context from someone in a highly emotional state.

Is this how we communicate international news and events to our people?

The poor lady on the front was a mother of a 7/7 victim. We all feel for her. But her statement that anyone who MIGHT be involved in terrorism should be locked up for 900 days (yes, that's 900 not 90) while the police check it out is appalling.

She herself MIGHT be involved in terrorism, and therefore should herself be locked up for 900 days while we check her out.

The security forces have always had detention powers, and powers to detain as long as they like , years if need be. But there is one difference, this power is to be sparingly, in times of national emergency, not willy nilly like today's police seem to think.

In fact there is one other difference. They can detain for as long as they like, but they cannot tell anyone about it, ie allow newspapers and tv shows to talk about it and/or identify people.

What the current government wants is the ability to detain people, and then tell everyone about it -- it's a PR exercise.

The following is an excerpt from

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/10/uk_terrorism_la.html

I get that terrorism is the threat of the moment, and that all sorts of government actions are being justified with terrorism. But this is ridiculous.

Did no-one read yesterday's post ? Or should I draw some paranoid conclusions from the way my texts and mail seem travel through some parallel universe.

But back to the French.

'Death to the French' -- a fine read by Mr Forrester.

The rioters are going for it. But it's not civil war (yet), there is no opposition. It's a protest. They are complaining about something, and Mr Chirac seems to think that adding police will solve it.

Little chance of that. Adding policeman to a riot is like pouring petrol on a firework. Or even adding policemen to a group of youths tossing firecrackers.

Don't forget that police are scored on the number of arrests they make. It's in their interest.

If you understand their game, then things become easier.

So what have the French done? To the lay observer , they have talked about it a lot. And probably written some great emails.

Maybe this is an expose on how the EU runs, all talk and no walk.

The problems might start if an opponent appears on the street. Then it's a civil war. At the moment, it's only a protest, there is no-one to fight against.

If the hard-right appear, civil war will erupt and spread.

And whilst we in the UK treat our immigrants very nicely (better than the locals!!) , they will riot if an opponent appears.

Let's hope that we have a crushing response to this. We can all take a leaf of Comrade Putin's leadership here : gas the fockers (fighters?).

But rather than use tear-gas or some sinister nerve gas, why not give them the Marie Antoinette gas -- Laughing Gas.

The mob would be reduced to a bunch of howling drunks. The police can then nip in, and serve beer and whisky to anyone wanting more, the violence will stop, and the mob will wake up with the hangover from hell. That'll teach 'em.

Maybe Saddam can learn to use the Antoinette touch too.

It's amazing what you can get up to in the early hours of the morning.

A friend of mine (or was it me?) was wandering down Oxford Street and stumbled accross that great British phenomenon : Christmas lights in the first week of November. One might have thought that there are enough consumers pumping up their credit cards already, but obviously the powers that be know better -- we need more sparkly lights.

Chatting to the guys putting up the lights (and playing with the seriously cool cherry-pickers they have) I thought about the possibility of just driving down park lane , hanging the second left onto The Palace, and using the mega-hydraulic extension arm to capture the Union Jack off the top of Buckingham Palace.

I thought this was a silly idea.

But the guys doing the lights on Oxford Street pointed out that this was the very machine that plucked Batman off Buckingham palace after his protest against his child access.

So capturing the flag is not only possible, it's very easy.

And then you have won. The game finishes there and then. It's your palace, your country. Ask any Army officer, or any private for that matter.

Paintball done properly.

Capture the flag, and win the United Kingdom, the Commonwealth, and a bunch of other fun little clubs.

Of course we wouldn't want to upset Prince William over his inheritance (so we'd have to give it back), but god forbid if some French rioting mob figure this much out.

As the drill instructor in 'Full Metal Jacket' explains,

'And then you would be in a world of shit (merde)'

Solution : We need new laws preventing the use of cherry-pickers, ladders, stilts, climbing shoes, rope and carabiners. Teaching anyone how to climb a building and take down a flag should be punishable by being made to watch EastEnders until you die.

Sadly, this government might just try that.

This rioting is ridiculous.

So far, all we have had is rhetoric from the French Government and no action -- the silliness must be controlled now before it spreads. Spreads to Germany, spreads to Spain, and worse still, spreads to the USA.

Of course this begs the question will it make it across the channel to the UK? It may be Britain's finest hour, and time to bash Drake's drum, Nudge Nelson's Column and get our military boys to stand up against the darker sinister forces of THE INSTITUTION.

If Bush went to Iraq as god told him to, is it ok for a rapist to rape because god told him so?

If Saddam was wrong to gas the kurds, would the british police be wrong to gas the public?

We will be victorious by the use of the British secret weapon : Wine, Women and Song. That's how we did almost every war we ever fought. Even the Falklands. When the Royal Engineers fixed up the Atlantic Conveyor, the first thing they did was install a bar. Once the wine was flowing, the women followed, the men then got stuck into the jobs of defending the country, and victory was inevitable.

Be nice to your local policeman. It's not his fault. It is the organisation. And by the way, they really are selling gas masks in Selfridges near the Sony counter -- the dark men in the spy-spook department will help you.

Everyone knows that Charles is the heir to the throne in the UK.

But surely, William can only become King IF his father is King at some stage -- how can he inherit something that doesn't belong to his father?

In the unlikely event that Charles dropped dead before he has the chance to hold the Crown, doesn't that mean that Prince Andrew is the next in line to the throne?

Obviously if the Queen dies first, then Charles automatically becomes King, and William follows naturally.

Maybe there's a good book in here -- a hitman is hired to kill the Queen and Charles, in that order, so William becomes King. But due to British Rail, he accidentally kills them in the other order, producing King Andrew!

Of course, this would mean that Queen Fergie also steps up to the plate. Binge drinking would then become de-rigeur, and British Pubs would become temples of drinking (as they should be!).

The experts I have asked on this issue are divided. The law of primo-genitur seems to favour the King Andrew theory.

They say a drowning man rises three times before he goes down for good.

I think Mr Blunkett is on his third time.

But new for Christmas, is the game of 'Blind Man's Blunkett' (available at all good toyshops and parliaments )

The players are blindfolded, and presented with 10 children, each of whom must be identified using only hands.

If you work in the Cabinet, you don't have to wait your turn, and can change the rules of the game to suit yourself.

I tried to cash a cheque in Barclays bank yesterday.

But none of the pens were working. You know, the pens that are attached to the little black plastic things that you are supposed to use.

They havn't been working for months. I asked the staff about this in June, and they said 'we know, we are waiting for some refills'.

The problem is, do you really want to bank with an organisation that cannot even order some pens?

I asked the FSA about this, and they didn't care. Apparently Barclays are really good at banking and the FSA is quite happy with their competence.

I'm not, so I withdrew £3000 and put it in my mattress. I think it's safer there.

Meanwhile, the Manager of the Branch (you know who you are, you have a silly little thingy on your head) is doing his jigsaw puzzle with his other members of staff.

After all, I'm only the client.

And you are not a bank.

Maybe I'll start my own bank (I was so unimpressed I started a better company).

The Laundry Bank -- washes your money whiter than white.

ps: If Barclays don't raise their game I will start a campaign to get people to move their accounts. Mr Branson will agree that this is a good idea.