I always thought Fathers4Justice would fall out when that fella climbed the Tower Bridge crane with the distinct intimation of his bollocks poking out of his over-pants. That's pretty bad, isn't it? That can't have been in the committee meeting: let's dress up like Spider-Man (Dangerdad! To the rescue! Earthbound women can't stop us, just watch them try!), climb up something high (have a go at that, single mumslag), compromise national security (what if we'd been al-Qaida?) and then make ourselves look irredeemably ludicrous with the small matter of the too-tight tights and the insufficiently capacious superhero undercrackers. Lobby groups have fallen out over less; Ukip fell out over Kilroy-Silk. Nope. They weathered that storm. Everybody laughed. They stood firm. And what finally does for them is the threat to kidnap Leo Blair. I don't think I'm risking the youngling's security by saying, boys, you're better than this. I always thought that when the papers got hold of a possible kidnap story - a Beckham child, for instance - it was because one of the tot's parents had an autobiography due out. So far as I know, neither Blair has any literature in the pipeline, though with Cherie's Married To The Prime Minister currently standing at 14,217 in the online charts, she might like to consider kidnapping one of her children to mark her next publishing venture. Perhaps she'd like to kidnap Euan and send clippings of his facial furniture to the press, as proof it was him. That would indeed be evil genius. I'd read almost anything she wrote after that. Sorry, I was ignoring Fathers4Justice. This happens to them a lot, I feel sure, otherwise they wouldn't be such nutjobs. The "moderate" centre of the organisation never wanted to kidnap Leo at all. It was unkind; plus, if they were any good at kidnapping children, they'd be able to get ahold of their own, instead of climbing cranes. However, as is so often the case with grass-roots pressure groups (look at the WI - they're always being investigated by Special Branch), an extremist wing hatched this evil plan. It has been suggested by various pundits that this was not a plan so much as an "inebriated flight of fancy of three men in a pub" (the Independent). Two reasons why this cannot possibly be the case: first, one of the men's names was Jolly Stanesby. If you are a running joke, liable to get pissed and talk overblown idiocy in a saloon environment, the first thing you do is change your name from Jolly to, I don't know, Mask. Or Leopard. Plus, if you're a drunken fantasist, and Special Branch comes round your house, you don't say, "They were just warning me not to do anything silly." You'd say, "They pinned me down! And then they punctured my big toe with a compass and told me to join their dark society in a brotherhood of toe-blood!" These men, in other words, were definitely intending to kidnap somebody, even if the finer details have been lost to history. Matt O'Connor is right to close it down. Hopefully, this splinter will reopen as Fathers4Child-Snatching. Then we really will see some bollocks.