Everyone who reads Words: Woe & Wonder knows that we get e-mail from people who are passionate about language – with complaints dealing with everything from hacker to half-mast.

But such matters seem trivial compared to recent concern over the careless use of some potentially loaded words now that Washington has declared war. The term Muslim is high on the list.

HOMEGROWN HATE

Canada and other NATO members consider the premeditated mass murder of innocent men, women and children on Sept. 11, 2001 an attack against the entire alliance. They've vowed to bring those responsible to justice, and to break up terrorism networks operating around the world.

Although prime ministers and presidents have made it clear that this war is not against a specific country, ethnic group or religion, not everyone has heard. Indeed even before the rubble of the World Trade Center stopped smouldering the flames of intolerance ignited with shameful ferocity in some parts of North America.

Fires have been set at several mosques in Canada. Police are investigating assaults and death threats. Buildings have been defaced, and hate messages have appeared on computers and answering machines. The Canadian Muslim Civil Liberties Associations and other organizations have issued warnings to their members to be on constant alert now, whether at home, at work, or visiting a place of worship.

CBC News Online has received pleas from people urging tolerance. Letters have slammed the media for identifying the terrorists as Muslims, arguing that the term is dangerously misleading because "true" followers of the Islamic faith do not condone murdering innocent people:

This kind of journalism only serves to enflame public dissent towards the Muslim and Arabic populations around the world. We are as much the victims of this as anyone else. If the West insists in believing that all Muslims ascribe to the perverse ideology of a handful of militant Islamic groups, we must also believe that every Catholic ascribes to the ideology of the Irish Republican Army. Al-Aatif Murji Brampton, Ont.

Responsible reporters have pointed out that investigators believe "radical Islamic fundamentalist groups" planned and executed the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center – terrorist cells made up of militants, fanatics, extremists or some other label that clearly brands them.

But this distinction has made no difference to bigots. In a binary age, when information circles the globe in seconds, complex concepts have been reduced to zeros and ones: On, off; Arab, non-Arab; Muslim, non-Muslim.

Racism may be that simple, but reality is not.

ISLAM, MUSLIM

Islam, a term that many scholars say means "submission to God," is the religion of Muslims ("those who submit to God"), also spelt Moslems. Islamic leaders interpret the root words "Silm" and "Salaam" differently, arguing that the name of the faith actually stands for "peace." It was founded in the Arabian peninsula in the 7th century, and now has about one billion followers worldwide.

The holy book is the Koran, sometimes spelt Qur'an – an old Arabic word for "recite." It is divided into more than 100 sections known as "suras," which Muslims believe were given to the last of Allah's (God's) prophets, Mohammed. He is said to have built on and perfected the teachings of Abraham, Moses and Jesus.

Islam has two major branches: "Sunni" (traditionalists who believe Mohammed designated no successor) and "Shia" (whose members, Shiites, believe that Mohammed assigned his son-in-law, Ali, to take his place.) There are also several smaller divisions, as well as individual sects, like the "Ismailis," within a given group.

NOT BLACK AND WHITE

As with virtually all religions of the world, there are disagreements over how to interpret scripture. Many Muslim leaders, including those in Canada, say the Koran unequivocally forbids killing innocent people. Even in battle, they say, Islamic soldiers are not allowed to hurt women, children, the elderly or other civilians.

There is debate over the controversial concept of jihad, which is often defined as a "holy war" – the modern-day equivalent of the Crusades fought by Christians almost a millennium ago. Some theologians believe that the word, which actually means "effort," refers to defending one's life, land and religion, as well as striving internally to improve. Although they concede it may also mean an active campaign against any unjust regime, they insist that such a war can be waged only against political leaders, not innocent people.

But radical Islamic fundamentalists view the scripture far differently. Virtually nothing is off limits during jihad, according to them, including the kidnapping, hijacking, and murder of civilians. This has certainly been apparent since fugitive Osama bin Laden began his campaign to force U.S. troops out of Saudi Arabia. His now-infamous 1998 fatwa, or religious edict, read in part: "The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies, civilians and military, is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country."

Fundamentalism, by the way, is based on the Latin word "fundare" (to found), and refers to religious movements that impose strict and literal interpretations of a faith's foundation, its scripture. This approach is not unique to Islam. Some Christians, for example, have adopted very narrow views of the Bible. It should be noted that only fanatical fundamentalists condone murder.

PAST PREJUDICES

As with most religions, Islam has been demonized by "infidels" (those not faithful to the majority's beliefs) over the centuries. For instance, in the Middle Ages mahound was often used to describe devils, false gods, or monsters. The term is synonymous with the prophet Mohammed. In the 16th century, Protestants resurrected this slur to attack Catholic rivals.

An equally obscure word is mussulman, which was commonly heard in Nazi concentration camps during the Second World War. It is from a German term for Muslim ("muselmanner") and referred to any prisoner who had reached a state of physical and emotional exhaustion. The word is cited by British lexicographer Jonathon Green as an example of stereotyping, with Muslims unfairly cast as symbols of surrender – fatalists "unmoved by worldly events" in their submission to God.

One noun that has stuck is assassin, defined in most English dictionaries as anyone who murders a high-profile figure in a surprise attack for political or religious reasons. It's an old Arabic term for "hashish-eater," and was originally applied to militant members of the Nizari branch of Ismaili Muslims in northern Persia 1,000 years ago. They reputedly used the drug before carrying out their missions during the Crusades.

The language of prejudice and hatred has not been harder on Muslims than on anyone else, according to Green. "Unlike Judaism and the various branches of Christianity, Islam and the Muslims whose religion it is, have been given a comparatively gentle ride until recently," he wrote in his 1996 book Words Apart. But that has begun to change with news coverage of violence in the Middle East, the revolution in Iran, bloodshed in Algeria, and the draconian rule of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

By the way, Terrorism – which comes from the Latin word for "dread" – originally had nothing to do with religious fundamentalism. It was first used to describe the "Reign of Terror" in France during that country's Revolution of 1789-94. The party in power governed by threats and executions, and the term eventually came to mean using fear to get one's way, especially by hurting or killing innocent people.

THE BIN LADEN LINK

When 168 people died in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, many angry Americans rushed to the conclusion that Islamic fundamentalists were to blame – an assumption that turned out to be wrong. They seemed stunned that Timothy McVeigh, a former U.S. army sergeant turned terrorist, had planted the explosives.

Some critics have questioned why the name and image of the FBI's prime suspect, Osama bin Laden, circulated so swiftly after this month's attacks:

"Because most media people and government officials were so quick to link these skillfully orchestrated disasters to the expertise and influence of a militant Saudi dissident, Osama bin Laden, I and all Muslims were clearly 'marked' as guilty by association," wrote Mohamed Elmasry, the national president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, in the Globe and Mail Sept. 14.

Other visible minorities complained that they were being targeted as well. For instance, CBC News Online received several letters like this:

People see bin Laden on TV with a turban and think anyone who wears a turban somehow supports his cowardly organization. I have already heard stories of Sikhs being beat up because ignorant people think that they are Muslim. PLEASE try to put yourself in my shoes for just a second. I think that in times like these, humanity as a whole has to stick together and help each other out, not spread hate and ignorance onto innocent others. Kulwant Singh

Journalists, of course, have an obligation to put stories into context. When hijacked passenger jets are turned into guided missiles that destroy skyscrapers full of workers and tourists it's simply not sufficient to report that "some people killed a whole bunch of other people in Manhattan." As more information emerges, including the identity and motivation of the terrorists, it must be passed on.

But just as we would not include the race or religion of someone in a story unless it's relevant, we must be careful how details are presented. There's a world of difference between stating that "Investigators think Muslims hijacked the planes" and "The terrorists are believed to have been Islamic fundamentalists bent on killing Americans and their allies."

CBC's Radio, TV and Web services have all offered indepth reports on bin Laden's terrorist organization, al-Qaeda ("the base"), and have reviewed the history of his ties to Afghanistan. It's impossible to keep religion out of news coverage when fatwas have been issued calling on all Muslims to kill Americans and their supporters, and when the ruling Taliban renames its country the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan." The very word Taliban, in fact, means "students of religion and knowledge."

CONCLUSION

In last year's book Terror in the Mind of God, University of California sociology professor Mark Juergensmeyer looked at the warped views of small bands of terrorists prepared to slaughter innocent people in the name of religion. Such killers do not come from one part of the world, wear one type of dress, have one colour of skin, or follow one faith. But all of them – whether radical Sikhs from India, Islamic extremists from the Middle East, or Christian militants from North America – consider themselves soldiers in a war between good and evil.

The recent attacks against the United States were diabolical, defined by the Canadian Oxford as both fiendishly cunning and inhumanly cruel. At the heart of this label rests the old Latin word, "diabolus," which means devil. The horrific acts were carried out in the name of God, but the true culprits were hatred and fanaticism – conditions Israeli novelist Amos Oz calls "two ancient mental illnesses."

Canada's Muslim community has categorically condemned the murders as vicious, cowardly and a violation of Islam's core scripture, the Koran. But some people don't appear to have grasped, or cared about, the difference between mainstream Muslims and breakaway groups of radical Islamic fundamentalists. Schadenfreude has not helped, with reports of some radicals celebrating the anguish of Americans.

Many news organizations have not hesitated to show us the cancer of bigotry that can spread quickly when people are fearful and ignorant. The effects on children were highlighted in a report on CBC TV's The National:

"I'm feeling bad because of all this tragedy," one young Muslim boy in Toronto said as the country observed a national day of mourning after the attack. "But there's one thing which has been bugging me … Why are the Muslims always getting blamed?" His sister is now afraid to wear her head scarf, or hijab, outside. Police have begun patrols around their school.

There's a word to describe the death threats and firebombs that have been hurled at Canada's Arab and Muslim communities recently: terrorism – the deliberate attempt to hurt or frighten innocent people. Other visible minorities have also been targeted.

Our government leaders tell us that we must be more vigilant at airports, border crossings, and countless other places because the threat of terrorism remains. This is undoubtedly true. But we must also keep an eye on the sometimes explosive words we use, and the impressions they convey, for the same reason.

As Jonathon Green put it a few years ago: "(E)very slur, every stereotype, every nationalistic and racist assumption is no more than war without weapons … People are killed and maimed, imprisoned and tortured for what, after all, has begun as no more than language. It is not a power to be underestimated."

Read letters about Backlash of Bigotry