He wears the topical helmet, complete with bugshield and baggy pants, waving a baton as though to lead a bow legged band. Bulging eyes betray uncertainty; the fierce face focused first here now there. He is a policeman, paid to protect the public peace. But he is confused, it is the peaceful public he is sworn to protect which is the object of his chest-pounding territorial assertion.

This daunting dance of the barrack bully brings to mind the thought that such blind obedience might in other ways be misled.

When the light of reason dims, the dullness gives the leader sway. Like a leashed dog, trained to attack on demand, the mindless police cannot sort the suspect from the innocent and unsuspecting sideline spectator, biting both to bone.

The toll booth makes the necessary net. Once closed, the attendants can go home. There is but the mopping up. The traffic, unable to turn, and tightly tamped by successive travelers, is targeted for torture as told by TV watchers tickled in their turreted tower.

Like Napoleon atop a hill, the stage director sends a battalion to the flank. As the battle unfolds, the peaceful leaders address the crowd, speaking the unspoken truth. The water weapons are wound up for wetting. The helicopter hovers above, sending live the scene. It is one of the wonders of the IT age. Our public servants must have the latest technology to protect the national security.

Before the linked screen, a semi-senile smiles and smirks, smacking to see such success. Ah, look, there one goes down ... drag him away. Put those others in the truck. Lob a cannister or two to keep them quiet. Never mind that some are blinded. It may be necessary to kill one or two. We must keep the peace.

What more can be asked of these our own? Will they infiltrate and masquerade? Will they plot and persuade to mischief? Will they don their daily uniform to deceive their own? If a man in normal uniform presents himself before his fellows, can this falseness be faulted as pretense? If a military officer moves military machine guns, can this be categorised as theft?

There are limits to what can be allowed. Receiving stolen goods in pretense of fencing may not be false, but to lay the plan and lead the perpetration of crime is beyond the permissible. Entrapment is the issue. Who is the entrapper, and whom the entrapped?