Connecting the Dots

If — God forbid — we were attacked by terrorists tomorrow and you found out that they had been living in this country and planning for some time — talking to each other on land lines or cell phones — and our intelligence on their existence was zero, what would you think?

I would be outraged. I would wonder how it could be possible that we had learned nothing from September 11th.

I would want to throw out leadership from the president, right through the intelligence agencies. If terrorists are talking and planning in this country or outside of it, I want the FBI and the CIA to be hot on their trail. I want them to watch them and learn what they are doing and how wide their circle is and everything about their plot and then I want them arrested. I do not want to wake up one morning and learn that something was going on right under our noses and we were helpless to stop it.

That is why I'm having a hard time understanding the "outrage" in the mainstream media over a program — that has not been confirmed by the president — that would scan faceless phone numbers to look for call patterns.

I hope that President Bush is right when he says that everything they've done to protect us is within the law.

They should be careful not only to connect the dots, but also to dot the "i's" and cross the "t's" as they proceed to keep us safe. That said, I am convinced that credit card companies and places I've purchased things on the Internet that make me fill out two pages of information, know a lot more about me than a scan of my phone calls would divulge.

Now, the controversy surrounding "The Da Vinci Code." I've been reading the book to prepare for the segments we are doing this week on it.

It's a good read so far. I tend to stay away from books that "everybody" is reading and got it on pretty good authority that it starts out strong and then kind of goes off on a tangent that loses the reader a bit. I'm almost done — so I'll let you know.

While I fully support Dan Brown's right to write the book, what bothers me is the propensity on the part of so many to take it as gospel. He does tend to blur the lines in saying that much of what he writes is "fact" and that causes some dangerous confusion. But I think the bigger fault that it may point out in our society is that some of us — and I include myself — do not have the understanding of the Bible that we should. That leads to allowing "fiction" and popular culture to fill in the blanks in an easy and potentially dangerous way. If we all knew our stuff, we could sit back — if we choose — and watch this for what it is: a movie.

Here are some of your e-mails on the topic, that we didn't get to today:

Hi Martha:
I vote that "The Da Vinci Code" movie should never have been made. I am very disappointed in Ron Howard for directing it and Tom Hanks for starring in it. The idea that Jesus married Mary Magdelene is preposterous. The whole reason Jesus came to Earth was to be crucified for our sins and raised again from the dead so we can have eternal life in heaven. He never intended to set up an earthly kingdom.
The movie will be very confusing to the masses of people who do not read their Bible, so will not be able to decipher fact from fiction.
Janie Gearhart
Ponca City, OK

Tom Hanks and Ron Howard are lucky that they chose to make a movie defaming and slandering Jesus Christ and not Allah! If they had chosen to do the same to Muslims, they would have incited riots worldwide and had bounties put on their own heads by now. Christians, on the other hand, will hopefully get back by boycotting the movie and not rioting and killing people. If justice is delivered, Tom and Ron will lose millions on this movie.
Marv Schutz

Get someone with a little more open mind than that Hank character. I'm a retired firefighter. Ever heard the saying, "Where there's smoke, there's fire"?
This book and movie wouldn't have hit such a nerve if there weren't something there. It would be more remarkable — and notable — for Jesus, a Jew in his day and age, not to be married than married.
I was studying this, as an amateur, before the current hoopla. I don't know whether he was married or not, and that is what anyone who has looked into it closely, with an open mind, should conclude.
Ask Bart D. Ehrman, author of "Misquoting Jesus," what he thinks.
Jess Moore

It's FICTION! The best way to give fiction plausibility is to argue with it based on dogma. The religious fundamentalists do nothing but show their insecurity in the foundation of their own beliefs by even bothering to argue with the book. It's "The Life of Brian" all over again.

Thanks to all of the above — and all the rest of you for writing. More on this hot topic all week.

See you tomorrow,

What do you think? Send your comments to:

Watch "FOX News Live" with Martha MacCallum, weekdays at 2 p.m. ET.

Martha MacCallum currently serves as the co-anchor of "America's Newsroom" alongside Bill Hemmer (Weekdays 9-11AM/ET). She joined FOX News Channel (FNC) in January 2004. Click here for more information on Martha MacCallum