LaShawn is hoping to own the Da Vinci Code tag by the time the promotion for the move picks up heavily in the next few months.

First of all, I think the book was a great read. I couldn’t put it down. I am also extremely fascinated by a lot of the mathematical aspects of the artwork that he discussed (phi, the “Divine Constant”, etc). That said, however, it is key to remember that this book is fiction.

New Media Ministries has done a series of articles looking at some of the claims in the book. It’s a good place to start. Keep an eye on Gary Burger’s new blog for bite sized chunks.

James White thinks it needs to be taken seriously, and makes a good case.

Are we making a mountain out of a mole-hill? Should we just laugh at the The Da Vinci Code, enjoy the story, and ignore the statements it makes about the Scriptures, Christ, the apostles, the Church, etc.? Does this author have a point?

The answer is sadly very clear. No, this writer has not taken the time to consider this issue very deeply, nor has he listened to Dan Brown talk about his own book. I would suggest this reader check this page and listen to the mp3 linked on it as well. You will see that the story of this book reflects Brown’s own “research” on the subjects. You don’t do “research” for years on material that is merely “fiction.” Instead, the book is presented as fiction based on facts. The book itself begins by stating that what it says about art, architecture, and documents, is authentic. Authentic is not a synonym for “fiction.” And that brings us to the key issue: no one is arguing Langdon or Teabing actually exist. They are the fictional characters. But the assertions they make, in the guise of setting the foundation for the central conspiracy theory of the book, are presented not as fiction, or mere speculations. They are presented as unquestioned historical facts.

UPDATE: Speaking of Biblical fiction, this new book by famed occult-writer-turned-Christian Ann Rice, Out of Egypt, looks pretty interesting.

A riveting, reverent imagining of the hidden years of the child Jesus.

Attacked by a vicious bully, seven-year-old Yeshua employs uncanny powers to drop his assailant onto the sand and then to bring him back to life. It’s the remarkable beginning of the 26th novel by an author whose pulpy vampire chronicles hardly prepare us for a book so spiritually potent as this. Following Jesus and his family’s journey from Egyptian exile to their ancestral home, it recasts Bible stories (the Magi’s visit, the presentation at the temple) in the detailed context of Jewish rebellion against Herod Archelaus, the impious ruler of Israel. A cross between a historial novel and an update of Tolstoy’s The Gospel in Brief, it presents Jesus as nature mystic, healer, prophet and very much a real young boy. Essentially, it’s a mystery story, of the child grappling to understand his miraculous gifts and numinous birth.

This post, like our popular Schiavo Cast of Characters, is designed to summarize who all of the key players in the Able Danger saga, how they relate to each other, and what their roles are. There is a massive amount of information flowing around the web on this topic, and keeping it all straight was making our heads spin, so here is a synopsis for our reference and yours.

This is just a quick start, which I will be adding to and updating over the next several weeks. One real sleeper in all of this is the China connection that seems to be bubbling under the surface. I’ve not quite put my finger on it yet, so it is not included very explicitly in this list, but I have an inkling that it will become much more prominent in the coming days.

Hugh Shelton

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who created Able Danger, a small highly classified US Army Intelligence program, in 1999.

Rep. Curt Weldon

Curt Weldon is a republican representative from Pennsylvania who first disclosed Able Danger’s existence on 6/27/2005. He is vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees.

I have learned that, in fact, one of our Federal agencies had, in fact, identified the major New York cell of Mohamed Atta prior to 9/11; and I have learned, Mr. Speaker, that in September of 2000, that Federal agency actually was prepared to bring the FBI in and prepared to work with the FBI to take down the cell that Mohamed Atta was involved in in New York City, along with two of the other terrorists.

Weldon also stated that information regarding Able Danger was given to the 9/11 Commission, and ignored.

“Why weren’t they briefed? Was there some deliberate attempt at the staff level of the 9/11 commission to steer the commissioners away from Able Danger because of where it might lead?” Weldon asked. “Why was there no mention of Able Danger?”

On 10/21/2005, Weldon blasted the DIA for removing Shaffer’s security clearance. (Via Molten Eagle)

So what has happened to Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer, Mr. Speaker? The Defense Intelligence Agency has lifted his security clearance. One day before he was to testify before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, in uniform, they permanently removed his security clearance. And now our Defense Intelligence Agency has told Colonel Shaffer’s lawyer that they plan to seek a permanent removal of his pay and his health care benefits for him and his two children. Why, Mr. Speaker? Because Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer, like Commander Scott Philpot of the Navy, like J. D. Smith, and like a host of other Able Danger employees, has told the truth.

Mr. Speaker, this is not America.

Timothy J. Roemer, John F. Lehman, Lee H. Hamilton, Al Felzenberg

Roemer and Lehman were members of the 9/11 Commission. Hamilton was vice chair of the Commission, and Felzenberg was a spokesman for the 9/11 Commission. All four men denied that they had information regarding the identification of Atta before 9/11.

Hamilton:

“The Sept. 11 commission (search) did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell,” said Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana. “Had we learned of it obviously it would’ve been a major focus of our investigation.”

Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer

Lt. Col. Shaffer has claimed that he was the source for Weldon, and that Able Danger identified Mohamed Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers (Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid al-Mihdar and Nawaf al-Hazmi) as possible members of al Qaeda by mid 2000. From the World Peace Herald:

Army Reserve Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, a civilian employee of the Defense Intelligence Agency who was a liaison to the project said that in early 2000, it produced a chart bearing the names — and in some case photographs — of about 60 people thought linked to al-Qaeda.

Among them was Mohamed Atta, the plot ringleader.

Navy Captain Scott Philpott

Philpott is an expert in futuristic naval warfare who supported Shaffer’s claims with the following statement:

I have briefed the Department of the Army, the Special Operations Command and the office of (Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence) Dr. Cambone as well as the 9/11 Commission. My story has remained consistent. Atta was identified by Able Danger in January/February 2000.

J.D. Smith

Smith is a civilian contractor who worked on Able Danger. He has been identified as the person who discovered Atta’s name as linked to al Qaeda through Omar Abdel Rahman.

Michael Maloof

Maloof was a one time aid to Richard Perle, more recently a Pentagon security official in the office of Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith, who had his security clearance revoked based on allegedly false charges. He was asked by Weldon to work with Eileen Preisser, who ran the Information Dominance Center at LIWA, in writing about Able Danger.

Frankly, I’m still trying to figure out exactly where he fits into the picture. He seems to have been involved with Syria, China technology transfers and Iraq.

He also appears to have the same lawyer as Shaffer and Smith

Omar Abdel Rahman

Rahman was involved in the first World Trade Center bombing, and was apparently the link to al Qaeda by which Able Danger discovered Atta’s name.

Mark Ewing, Lowell Jacoby, Bill Huntington, Earl Sheck.

DIA employees at a high level who are leaving, or who are rumored to be leaving the DIA.

Dietrich Dieter Snell

Executive Director Zelikow Jamie Gorelick staffer who allegedly is the one (via AM) who kept Able Danger from the 9/11 Commission. Snell apparently was also involved in the FBI investigation into TWA Flight 800, for whatever that connection is worth.

UPDATE: Captain Ed wonders about the veracity of the “Snell worked for Gorelick” allegation. [Sentence above corrected per TopDog’s post].

Other resources:

QT Monster has an incredible list of video links about Able Danger.

Random Stuff

Linking to LaShawn’s blogospheric conditions.
Linking to Ian’s open trackbacks Monday.
Taking a Sunday drive with Joyner.

The White House is rumored to be quietly exploring its options for withdrawing Miers’ nomination, according to the Washington Times.

The White House has begun making contingency plans for the withdrawal of Harriet Miers as President Bush’s choice to fill a seat on the Supreme Court, conservative sources said yesterday. “White House senior staff are starting to ask outside people, saying, ‘We’re not discussing pulling out her nomination, but if we were to, do you have any advice as to how we should do it?’ ” a conservative Republican with ties to the White House told The Washington Times yesterday.

The White House denies it.

James Joyner says it’s now or never.

If the White House has serious concerns about how Miers will do in the hearings, they should persuade her to withdraw now. If they subject her to the hearings, then she deserves an up-or-down vote.

The Galvin Opinion goes out on a preddy sturdy limb and predicts:

Harriet Miers will not make the Supreme Court and probably won’t even make it to the Senate’s Judiciary Committee hearings.

Carol Platt Liebau, writing for Human Events, discusses the political fallout of such a withdrawal. (Via Confirm Them)

Politechnical lists four reasons this will be a good thing in the long run.

Paul is glad for one thing:

I’m consoled only by the knowledge that our political memories are usually short.

Charles Krauthammer has a discussion of an exit strategy.

We need an exit strategy from this debacle. I have it.

Lindsey Graham has been a staunch and public supporter of this nominee. Yet on Wednesday he joined Brownback in demanding privileged documents from Miers’ White House tenure.

Finally, light at the end of this tunnel. A way out: irreconcilable differences over documents.

Red State:

Miers competency has now become an issue and that will bleed enough blood in the water to cause a political feeding frenzy forcing a withdrawal.

The question is now how to Withdraw the Miers nomination and limit the escalating damage to the administration.

Taegan Goddard echoes Krauthammer:

…several Republican senators have joined with Democrats demanding the White House release documents relating to work Miers has done for President Bush. With the White House claiming executive privelege on the documents, this may give the administration cover for withdrawing the troubled nomination for a greater principle.

Patterico still thinks she’ll be confirmed.

Sen. Cornyn is sticking by her.

Balloon Juice observes:

The story presents an interesting problem as to who to believe- the White House, or the Washington Times?

At any rate, if Miers does withdraw, how does Bush stand up and introduce her successor as the ‘most qualified’ person for the job?

AcePilots notes the Tradesports odds have dropped like a rock overnight. (Via Unabrewer)

UPDATE: NZ Bear is putting his finger to the wind, and taking the pulse of the blogosphere. If you have a position, state it and if you’re in his ecosystem your position will be included in his running list.

To this point, I have been neutral, however, after the last week of blunders, sloppy responses to the Senate questionaire, I have come to the point where I think that she is probably a smart lawyer, would likely be a conservative judge, but just does not have the intellectual firepower and verifiable Constitutional track record to be placed into one of the most critical lifetime appointments in our country. It’s just not worth the gamble, even if you trust Bush. As such, here you go NZ: “I oppose the Miers nomination.”

UPDATE 2: Here is NZ’s page.

UPDATE 3: John Hinderaker is sticking to his guns, and writes a fascinating piece arguing against the current criticism.