Law & Society

The right to take photographs in the United States is being challenged more than ever. People are being stopped, harassed, and even intimidated into handing over their personal property simply because they were taking photographs of subjects that made other people uncomfortable. Recent examples have included photographing industrial plants, bridges, buildings, trains, and bus stations. For the most part, attempts to restrict photography are based on misguided fears about the supposed dangers that unrestricted photography presents to society.

Ironically, unrestricted photography by private citizens has played an integral role in protecting the freedom, security, and well-being of all Americans. Photography in the United States has an established history of contributing to improvements in civil rights, curbing abusive child labor practices, and providing important information to crime investigators. Photography has not contributed to a decline in public safety or economic vitality in the United States. When people think back on the acts of domestic terrorism that have occurred over the last twenty years, none have depended on or even involved photography. Restrictions on photography would not have prevented any of these acts. Furthermore, the increase in people carrying small digital and cell phone cameras has resulted in the prevention of crimes and the apprehension of criminals.

As the flyer states, there are not very many legal restrictions on what can be photographed when in public view. Most attempts at restricting photography are done by lower-level security and law enforcement officials acting way beyond their authority. Note that neither the Patriot Act nor the Homeland Security Act have any provisions that restrict photography. Similarly, some businesses have a history of abusing the rights of photographers under the guise of protecting their trade secrets. These claims are almost always meritless because entities are required to keep trade secrets from public view if they want to protect them.

In this world today the media television, newspapers and radio is the modern-day pulpit where the average person goes for their daily sermon. Some children in America watch up to six hours of television a day! This is where our children are learning about moral values, the future.

And what are they being taught?

A recent survey of the top 100 Hollywood producers those people who determine what is played on the televisions and in the movie houses of America and much of the world revealed these attitudes: 93% of these top executives say they seldom or never attend religious services. 75% describe themselves as left-of-center politically. 80% do not regard homosexual relations as wrong. More than half said they do not regard adultery as wrong.

Most importantly, two-thirds of these executives said they feel it is their job to promote these ideas their vision of the world through the media.

But there is one man, one couple, in the world which has taken on the power of the anti-values media. That is Reverend and Mrs. Moon.

The Washington Times promotes the values of family, virtue, world peace and reconciliation. It is a lone voice in a wilderness of violence, sex and immorality. The Washington Times has become the sole source of media power in the world's most powerful city defending those values which will lead the world out of darkness, panic and fear. And as a wife and mother I am deeply motivated to help fight this noble battle.

We are as a trumpet of truth in these days of confusion. Having worked at the heart of the media, I have learned that we must not be intimidated into cowardice by those who despise truth and deplore values. As women we must be bold in our commitment to defending traditional values and those things we hold sacred and dear in every aspect of life.

When I speak to women's groups there is one question I am asked most often. "How can I play a role?" they ask. Many women will tell me that they do not have confidence they can contribute. They tell me they have no Ph.D. no great career no experience in the work place.

I have a very simple answer. It is clear to me that what the world needs most urgently is not another business executive not another Ph.D. not another lawyer. These things may be important, but they alone will not bring us a world of peace in the next century.

What the world needs very simply are individuals with commitment and genuineness of heart. The world is starving for this heart! And as women of commitment we must have confidence that we can and will make a difference.

When I interview heads of state I often find them very weary. They see the troubles in the world and feel the suffering of those around them on their own hands. They are desperate for encouragement and help from those committed to the ideal of peace.

My grandmother is from the tiny village in France where the Catholic saint, Jeanne d'Arc, was born. I was raised as a young girl with the stories of this brave young farm girl. She was able to do what no man could do: move a weak and defeated king to take on his responsibility and finally fight the enemy. She saved her nation!

But there was one thing that always struck me about this story. Saint Joan had no formal education. She had no credentials. She had no friends in powerful places. She only had a simple faith in what was right and a simple faith in the power of God.

This section describes the most important recent changes to UK law in terrorist cases, and explains the new offences that have been created by three important recent Acts of Parliament:

• Terrorism Act 2000 (TA 2000)
• Anti-Terrorism, Crime & Security Act 2001 (ATCSA 2001)
• Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (PTA 2005)

Whilst, to an extent, previous anti-terrorist legislation (particularly those provisions designed to deal with paramilitary violence emanating from Northern Ireland) has been adopted in the new Acts, many new offences have been created. In addition, there has been a significant increase in police powers. The extent to which the police and prosecuting agencies can and do now operate has been widened, with a major impact on civil liberties.

The main provisions are:

• Terrorism
• Proscribed organisations
• Weapons training
• Directing terrorist organisations
• Possession for terrorist purposes
• Fund-raising
• Disclosure of information

It is important to note:
That there are many other offences, for instance relating to money laundering and public order, that arise in a terrorist context. Some of these are new, but have not been included here. Some arise from the operation of increased police powers and are explained in the section on Police Powers. In addition, the Terrorism Act 2006, which has very recently come into force, again creates new offences. Because of the controversy surrounding this Act, its main provisions are dealt with separately.

Zakia Mahasa, Master Chancery in the Family Division of the Baltimore City Circuit Court
by Nadirah Z. Sabir, Azizah magazine.

Zakia Mahasa, the first Muslimah ever to be appointed to a judgeship in the American courts, never apologizes for who she is; instead, she gains respect and accumulates success after success by focusing on being outstanding at whatever she does.

A powerful presence in the courtroom and a dynamic woman who knows her own mind, Zakia has possessed this drive to achieve and strong sense of direction since her earliest years.

"When I was about four years old," she smiles, "I was reading the newspaper. There's a game, Wishing Well. 'You'd count the letters in a name--mine spelled out, One day, you'll be a lawyer or doctor.' So I thought, I have to do really well in kindergarten so I can get into a really good first grade!"

Since then Zakia's fortunes have multiplied with the power of that kind of determination and focus and on her belief in God. She asserts passionately that what gives her the aplomb to pursue her interests and to be herself is her Islamic faith.

"You really have to have a certainty and surety and confidence about yourself," as a Muslimah, Zakia advises. "It carries me through everything I do. My way of life [as a Muslimah] is superior to anything out there. I believe God wanted me in this position."

Zakia's study of Islam began while she was an undergraduate at the University of Maryland, where she was majoring in business management. She declared her shahadah [profession of faith] a year later.

"It was initially difficult for my mother," Zakia recalls. "I had a cousin who had a bad experience with the Nation of Islam." But Zakia knew her path and stuck to it, and by the time Ramadan came, only two weeks after her conversion, Zakia says her mother "had my meals ready at the end of the day!"

Zakia's father had more pragmatic concerns over his daughter's conversion to Islam. Since Zakia was headed toward law school at that time, he wondered whether there would be any place for a Muslimah in the circles of American law. Zakia herself was not at all worried. She explains, "Islam really does free you of all that. If God wants it for you, nobody can take it away. I felt that as long as I looked professional and really knew what I was doing," success would follow.

Zakia's father asserted that appearances are important in the legal profession, but Zakia would not compromise her faith. "When I first became Muslim, from the very beginning I was covered," she says. "At work I knew it was important to look professional. I dress well. I wear suits, skirts, dresses, blazers. They're longer, looser. I don't wear over-garments to work, but it's evident I'm being modest. My hair is always covered, but pulled back and out of the way. I did my research and I am convinced that I am properly covered; you can dress many ways and still be properly covered."

Much of her success Zakia attributes directly to this refusal to betray herself or her Islamic principles in order to be accepted by or blend in with others. Of her iman [faith], she says firmly, "I don't wear it on my sleeve. But I don't hide it. It's who I am." If you stand for what you are, even if it is different from the mainstream, Zakia believes, others will respect you.

"My being a Muslim doesn't mean I'm standoffish or reclusive. I'm very approachable," she says.

Above all, she advises, in order to earn the respect of others, "You have to be good," at what you do.

Zakia excels at what she does. As Master Chancery in the family division of the Baltimore City Circuit Court, she presides over domestic cases, hearing anywhere from nine to thirty of them a day. These cases tend to be emotional and complicated, involving abused, neglected and delinquent children. Zakia unabashedly brings a healthy Islamic outlook to her work, believing that often the best way to propagate Islam is by example.