when slaman rushdie wrote a book there was so much demostration
against him ? but he did not kill anybody. when innocent people are killed why there is no “fatwa” against the kilers of innoncents or declaring them as kafirs by muslim authorities?
There has been enough said and written by real scholars on how these actions were unjust and unislamic. If your local newspaper chooses not to find that newsworthy thats too bad.
Rvizk...they were the same people who issue Fatwas. Hope that clarifies things for you.
Rvikz: Fatwas come in all variety. That' s why they are meaningless. How seriously would you take a fatwa against the terrorists if they issue a fatwa against an author?
does their action comes under blashphemy or violation of criminal laws?
Hijacking planes and kidnapping
From that which is known to everyone who has the slightest bit of common sense is that hijacking airplanes and kidnapping children and the like are extremely great crimes, the world over. Their evil effects are far and wide, as is the great harm and inconvenience caused to the innocent; the total effect of which none can comprehend except Allaah.
Likewise, from that which is known is that these crimes are not specific to any particular country over and above another country, nor any specific group over and above another group, rather it encompasses the whole world.
There is no doubt about the effect of these crimes; so it is obligatory upon the governments and those responsible from amongst the scholars and other than them to afford these issues great concern, and to exert themselves as much as possible in ending this evil.
Shaykh Ibn Baaz
K ayfa Nu'aalij Waaqi'unaa al-Aleem - Page 108-109
Hijacking planes and ships
Question: There are some people who hijack a plane or a ship, and do so to apply pressure upon the country to which this plane or ship is headed. It is possible they threaten to kill the passengers, and in some cases actually kill some of them, until their demands are met. So what is the ruling about such actions, especially since such actions terrify the passengers?
Response: It is upon (every) country to provide sufficient security to prevent the likes of these rebels from taking over (planes or ships). It is upon the (respective) country to provide every airline with security (whilst on their land) which is sufficient to resist any hijack attempts by the aggressors; just as they should also co-ordinate a full (passenger) inspection prior to (their) boarding. Thus, they should not permit anyone to proceed (to board) until after they have ascertained that no-one is in possession of weapons even if it be (a piece of) metal (bar or the like). In addition to this, some gangs force the aircraft to divert to another destination, so if there are (amongst the crew or passengers) anyone with sufficient physical training to overpower them, then the rebels' plans will be destroyed.
So there is no doubt that hijacking is a mistake, ignorance and falsehood. Further, it is a transgression beyond the limits causing terror to the passengers, and threatening them with that which they have no power to carry out, and Allaah knows best.
Shaykh Ibn Jibreen
Kayfa Nu'aalij Waaqi'unaa al-Aleem - Page 113
Attacking the enemy by blowing oneself up
Question: There are those who tie a magazine of explosives around their waist, then they enter a government or residential building or a gathering of people either kuffaar or other than them, then they blow themselves up, so what is the ruling regarding this? And is something like this act considered an aspect of jihaad, and is the one doing so considered a shaheed (martyr) or one who has committed suicide (muntahir)?
Response: No doubt on the face of it he is one who has committed suicide, whereby he has made certain he will be killing himself before anyone else. However, this can be permissible if he is in warring kuffaar territory, and knows he will sooner or later be killed at the hands of the enemy, or will face severe torture and has not found any ploy except to blow himself up and kill others from the enemy (who subject the Muslims to torture) along with himself. In doing so, killing a number of them thereby weakening their strength/force and reducing their harm and scaring them. So this can be permissible even if it involves killing the person himself, if he knows he will certainly be killed, or persecuted and wishes to rid himself of their harm and attain ease for himself, and his matter is with Allaah the Almighty.
Shaykh Ibn Jibreen
Kayfa Nu'aalij Waaqi'unaa al-Aleem - Page 117
Re: why no “fatwa” against terrorists?
terrorists pay mullahs to keep their mouth shut?.. :kaboom:
Quran already has issued rulings for such things, there is no need to say it again....
Re: Re: why no “fatwa” against terrorists?
When you done with indiscriminate bombing blowing & shooting missiles against Mullahs ,you would be fool not to realise your post speak for, who you are …a.Senseless anti arab anti muslim to the core .Your posts i have read so far 
Rvikz ..i think by now you know a criminal act does not NEED fatwa ,…then i can demand there was no fatwa against Clintons indiscretion then it is o.k. 
or thousands of murders every month needlessly in this society dioes not NEED FATWA TO DETERMINE RIGHT & WRONG THAT WHICH HAS BEEN DEALT WITH & PUNISHMENT WRITTEN IN BOOK,…WE NEED BETTER LAW & ORDER (not the t.v. show): 
MashaAllah. A true religion forum…only now! 
Didn’t the terrorists give out fatwas on themselves?
:I’m like totally lost here: 