The Council on American-Islamic Relation (CAIR) has tipped its hand when it comes to its true intentions in the United States of America. A ballot measure recently passed by voters in Oklahoma to ban the use of contemplation of Sharia law in court decisions. The measure garnered more than 70% support. Sharia law is specific Islamic law and has no place in the United States of America when court decisions are made. The ballot measure was put forward after over 80 courts in England have allowed Sharia law to be contemplated in decision making and rulings. In other words, there was indeed a basis for concern in putting forth the ballot measure, it was not done willy-nilly.

CAIR however has filed a direct lawsuit claiming it is simply bashing those of Islamic faith. To anyone who looks at the situation though it doesn't take too much to come to the conclusion that voters in Oklahoma seem to have preempted some goal of CAIR in this country - and CAIR is none too happy with it.

Why would a so-called "civil rights" group actively pursue filing a lawsuit against a popular ballot measure that clearly spells out that the supreme law of this country is the U.S. Constitution, unless their motives in the end were to do away with such? If CAIR and those who support them were not ultimately trying to push for a Sharia based law system why would they attack attempts to preempt and stop it? A true non-profit civil rights group would put out a statement or a stance that they felt the ballot was an attack on them and make the public aware, but they would not go as far as trying to kill a ballot measure passed by voters.

The average voter can now see with this action by CAIR that their intent in the end was to indeed have Sharia law considered in the courts - either now or in the future. Their filing of the lawsuit has tipped their hand and made that abundantly clear.

The sad thing is that there has now been an injunction issued against the ballot measure by a federal judge not allowing it to be instituted. In other words, until that time Sharia law has an open and unadulterated place in our court systems according to this federal judge.

Fox News

U.S. District Court Judge Vicki Miles-LeGrange ruled that the measure, which passed by a large margin in last Tuesday's elections, would be suspended until a hearing on Nov. 22, when she will listen to arguments on whether the court's temporary injunction should become permanent.

"Today's ruling is a reminder of the strength of our nation's legal system and the protections it grants to religious minorities," said Muneer Awad, executive director of Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Oklahoma, who filed the suit last Thursday, claiming the law violated his constitutional rights.

The most bogus of arguments is that used above by Muneer Awad. His statement tries to justify the implementation and consideration of Sharia law contradictory to our own - and to declare that as his constitutional right. One need look no further than the Sharia law allowing the stoning of people to see that banning consideration of that law when making a decision in no way violates Awad's "rights". To the contrary, keeping that kind of law out of our court system upholds the rights of all in this country.

Awad continued using his serpent-like and deceptive language which twists reality in on itself to gain some kind of sympathy from patriotic Americans.

"We are humbled by this opportunity to show our fellow Oklahomans that Muslims are their neighbors and that we are committed to upholding the U.S. Constitution and promoting the benefits of a pluralistic society," Awad said.

I don't believe that many Americans in this country, of all faiths, ethnicitys and class, thought they would see a day when it was so openly declared that a specific religion and its laws - which are opposed by a large majority in this country and are in direct contradiction with our constitution - would actually be taken seriously as having any place in our courts. Or that they would see a day when a federal judge agreed that our constitution and its laws should be held in question; for that is what Judge Miles-LeGrange has done with her current decision.

And spare me the "well the Christians and the Ten Commandments..." argument. Those do not openly challenge our constitution and the laws of this land.

For Awad to try to say that allowing Sharia law to be considered in the courts is in some way "upholding the U.S. Constitution" shows exactly the type of snakes, liars and thieves that those who belong to CAIR are.

The good thing is that these serpents in our midst have exposed themselves for all to see. Anyone who was previously drawn in by the syrupy words of those like Awad and CAIR now see the truth of what they are attempting to do to this country and what they stand for.

And in the end, yes, that is a very good thing.