I've never read anything by Dan Brown. It’s a deliberate choice. I'm not ashamed of it.

But here I am outside a London bookshop before dawn talking to hardcore Dan Brown fans lining up for a copy of his new novel "The Lost Symbol." I've had better days.

Fans line up for copies of new Dan Brown thriller.

"I’m so excited," one says.

"I love his writing," says another.

They're all openly proud, loyal and passionate. All except one. "I’m here to get a surprise present for my wife." Yeah, right. Sure you are, mate.

For this group of fans, Dan Brown's first book since "The Da Vinci Code" is a very big deal. But this group isn’t very big. There are only about 12 people in the line when the shop doors open. None appears to have come dressed as their favourite Dan Brown character. But I could be wrong. Several are wearing beige.

This small group probably isn't representative of Dan Brown’s enormous fan base in Britain. The biggest selling adult paperbacks in this country’s history were written by Brown. And publishers expect "The Lost Symbol" will do well here too. The initial British print run is one million copies.

Just a few minutes after the book shop opens it's empty again. Dan Brown's army of fans clearly aren't as impatient or theatrical as the masses who lined up in costume for new "Harry Potter" books. Instead they're prepared to sleep until a reasonable hour, visiting book shops at their leisure where they’ll probably pay a heavily discounted price.

I interview a book shop spokesman who's stayed up all night reading all 509 pages of "The Lost Symbol."

He loves it. So much so I’m convinced to buy a copy "for my wife."

TSKHINVALI, Georgia - CNN is unpopular in Moscow right now. I met plenty of people there who were happy to tell me so. But we're liked even less in South Ossetia, especially among Russian soldiers.

So I was really happy to learn that while staying in South Ossetia's capital Tskhinvali we'd be sharing a tent with a Russian infantry unit and their weapons.

It turns out they like a drink and forcefully telling western journalists their coverage of this conflict is one sided.

My roommates are not alone in that view. There is an almost universal belief among Russians and Ossetians that the Western media have followed their politicians and are siding with Georgia.

They ask passionately: Why does no one criticize Georgia for attacking South Ossetia first? Why doesn't the world care about our suffering?

In South Ossetia's capital Tskhinvali there is much evidence of a brutal war fought on its streets. Women cry as they tell me of the night Georgian shells fell on their homes. Many of those homes are now rubble. Many were gutted by fire. Whole neighborhoods are gone.

The civilian death toll is still being debated but there are lots of people wearing black here.

South Ossetians say the Russians are their saviors. They drove out the Georgian army. They've launched a massive relief and rebuilding operation. And now Russian peacekeepers have built fortified checkpoints deep within Georgia to keep its artillery beyond striking range.

The most forward Russian peacekeeping post is just a few minutes drive away from the major Georgian town of Gori.

Here Russia has built high dirt walls and surrounded them with a moat and razor wire. Russian tanks are dug in with their turrets pointing south. And Russian soldiers stop and question every Georgian who wants to pass.

I asked one soldier why Russia is staying in Georgia. His reply: "This is not Georgia. This is not South Ossetia. This is the security zone."

The security zone extends around 15 kilometers, or nine miles, from South Ossetia into Georgia. Russia says it's always been allowed under the existing peacekeeping agreement between the two countries.

It means whole Georgian communities whose homes were scarred or destroyed during the Russian advance, must now live with a permanent Russian military presence.

"Why were you shooting at us?" a Georgian man asked a Russian soldier.

"You were shooting at us too," he replied.

LONDON, England – I upset Paris Hilton last night. I didn't mean to. I just wanted to take things a little further.

Let me explain.

Can we go to the next question?

Paris was in London promoting her latest fragrance Can Can. After thrilling a crowd of screaming fans during an appearance at Selfridges department store, she spent time talking to journalists. CNN was her last appointment for the day.

It started well. We talked scents. Why she likes them. Why she likes putting her name to them. Can Can is her fifth.

"All my fragrances definitely reflect my personality," she said.

We talked about her growing business empire (shoes, clothing, hair extensions etc.) and the power of the Paris Hilton brand. Why is it so successful?

"Everything in my line just completely represents who I am."

And we talked about fame.

"I don't really think about it because this is just my life. So it's something that I'm used to."

All pretty fluffy stuff. Interesting to some. But not the stuff of a CNN news story.

I tried to take things a little further.

Late last year Paris' grandfather Barron, the man who built the Hilton Hotel chain, announced he would be donating most of his $2.3 billion dollar fortune to charity. The reporting at the time focused on what that would mean to Paris Hilton's inheritance.

From her earliest days as a celebrity she was described as the "Hilton Hotel heiress." And she has continued that branding. Her autobiography is titled "Confessions of an Heiress." One of her fragrances is called Heiress. Her own music label is Heiress Records.

Paris Hilton has not commented publicly on her grandfather's philanthropy.

So I said: "As an heiress, it looks as if you stand to perhaps inherit a little less than the rest of the world expected you to. Did your grandfather's decision take you by surprise there with that announcement that he made?"

As I spoke, her expression remained unchanged. But her eyes said so much more. She didn't like where I was going. When I ended my question she hesitated for a moment. Then suddenly her trademark baby voice was replaced by a much harsher tone. "Can we go to the next question?"

I moved on. But the interview never recovered. I asked about life one year after doing time for driving offenses.

"Well I've definitely grown up a lot. And I'm just focusing on my business and my relationship. And I've never been happier. My life is amazing."

I pressed her to be more specific on how it had changed her. Clearly irritated, Paris Hilton took off her microphone and said she'd be right back.

While she was out of the room her manager and I had a robust conversation. Team Hilton was not happy with me.

It's really just one example of a common journalistic conflict. Celebrities and their advisers have their own reasons for seeking publicity, like selling perfume. But journalists are paid to dig deeper.

We knew she was promoting a product. They knew we wanted to talk about other things as well. The only agreed terms were no questions about videos or love life. No problem. We weren't interested in either. But that understanding was not enough to prevent the dispute.

Paris eventually returned and the interview resumed on the condition it wrapped up quickly with no more serious questions. She was composed as she dealt with two soft ones. And polite as we shook hands and said goodbye.

Among the questions I'd hoped to ask her was this: "In world of horrific wars and natural disasters, do you believe Paris Hilton's life is taken too seriously?"

Watch the interview here

LONDON, England – The front page headline of Britain’s Sun newspaper tells the story: "Mucca chucks a cuppa water over Macca’s lawyer Shacka."

For those who don’t speak British tabloid, here’s the translation: "Heather Mills throws a glass of water over Paul McCartney’s lawyer Fiona Shackleton."

She what? She couldn’t have. Surely not.

But the pictures are compelling.

On Monday morning Fiona Shackleton arrives at London’s Royal Courts of justice with Paul McCartney. Her hair styled in its usual impressive bouffant.

Then just a few hours later she leaves with Paul McCartney, looking like she’d just taken a shower, with her clothes on.

British newspapers quote unnamed witnesses who claim Heather Mills coolly and deliberately emptied a glass over her ex-husband’s lawyer.

If true, it’s a moment of drama and comedy that provides a fitting climax to this bitter, ugly and often ridiculous celebrity breakup.

Outside the court Mills didn’t hide her loathing for Shackleton. While attacking much of the legal process that led to her being awarded more than 48 million dollars, Mills said: “Fiona Shackleton has very sadly, handled this case in the worst manner you can ever, ever imagine. She has called me many, many names before even meeting me when I was in a wheelchair.”

Shackleton is known in London’s legal community as the Steel Magnolia. She’s famous because her clients are. She represented Prince Charles in his divorce from Diana.

The before-and-after images from the McCartney settlement show another interesting difference in Fiona Shackleton’s appearance. Despite her unwanted makeover she looks happy when leaving the court.

Is she pleased with the judgement? Or does she really like her new look? It’s possible. One British media outlet noted the slicked back do has taken 20 years off her appearance.

– For full judgement on McCartney-Mills click here (PDF document)