What is the President hiding?

November 14, 5:26 PM,   Columbia Conservative Examiner,  Anthony G. Martin

While overseas on yet another campaign tour, although there is no campaign, Barack Obama urged the Congress not to open a probe into the investigations of the Fort Hood terrorist attack. So what, exactly, is the President hiding?

Congressional probes into federal and military investigations are often hamstrung from the very start due to the time-lapse between the point at which the incident occurred and the point at which Congress opens a probe.

Too much of a time-lapse becomes a fertile breeding ground for convenient fading memories, evidence tampering, document shredding, and a litany of other problems associated with giving the players too much time to cover their tracks on the field.

Yet Obama has asked the Congress to delay its probe into the 1st terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, so that 'federal law enforcement and the military can have the freedom to conduct their investigations.'

What, exactly, about a Congressional probe would prevent the military and federal law enforcement from conducting their investigations? It would seem to me that given the gravity of the massacre it would be of great benefit for several agencies, including the Congress, to conduct investigations...that is, unless somebody has something to hide and doesn't want a probe to bring it to light.

Some have suggested that the White House is actually sitting on information that would show beyond doubt that there is a direct connection between Major Hasan and overseas terrorists.

So far, such a connection has only been suspected but not confirmed. We do know that Hasan attempted to contact Al Qaeda on numerous occasions, but so far no federal law enforcement agency will flatly deny that the terrorist made contact.

Allegations have also been widespread that Hasan funneled funds to Pakistan for the specific purpose of aiding Al Qaeda. Once again, there is no confirmation of this allegation from the White House, the FBI, or the military.

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs appropriately raises these questions concerning Hasan's 6-figure income and his mysterious lack of money.

The central issue in all of this for all decent Americans is the emergence of a definite pattern. The first overseas leader Obama calls once in office in January is the head of the Palestinian Authority to tell him that the U.S. is now firmly on the side of Palestinian interests. Obama has gone out of his way to snub Israel and its President, Benjamin Netanyahu. He has cozied up to state sponsors of terror. He refuses to use the terms 'terrorism' or 'Jihad.' He has turned loose from Gitmo some of the most dangerous terrorists in the world, some of whom have returned to fight in the Jihad. He has brought to U.S. the perpetrators of 9/11, preferring to try them in civilian court as criminals rather than in military courts as terrorist prisoners of war. He has refused to acknowledge that the Fort Hood massacre is an act of terror. And he wants the Congress to delay a probe into the information that he may be withholding from the public.

And this is only a small sampling of the many examples of Obama's clear partiality toward the Muslim world at the expense of the safety of U.S. citizens.

Early in Obama's administration, his Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, issued a report warning of 'rightwing, extremist, home-grown terrorists.'

This administration has absolutely no problem referring to members of the rightwing as 'terrorists,' yet when an act of unconscionable violence occurs at the hands of a Muslim extremist that term is avoided like the plague.

No doubt this is a double-standard. You decide why.