I’m trying to make sense of the [allegedly] murderous Nashville cab driver who ran over his passenger, because it’s been coming out in bits and pieces.
A lot of people are objecting to what seem clear attempts to hide the driver’s status as a Muslim from Somalia. Nothing new there; hiding such details goes on a lot, another example being the Salt Lake City shooter.
But there’s something that perplexes me even more than hiding the driver’s religion. At first, I grew suspicious about the fact that this was called a “religious dispute.” But now that I’ve read the details of the dispute, I’m more than suspicious; I’m appalled. If this report is correct, the cab driver was an out-and-out Nazi supporter:

A Nashville cabbie made anti-Semitic statements and praised Adolph Hitler’s campaign against Jews during a religious argument that culminated when he ran over one of the passengers as he left the taxi, witnesses said during a hearing today.
The cab driver, Ibrahim Ahmed, said Hitler was “trying to rid the world of Jews,” the alleged victim, Jeremie Imbus, told the court.
“I just remember …(being)… I guess the word is ‘shocked,'” Imbus said of the Feb. 18 incident.

(Via Glenn Reynolds.)
Let’s assume that the same driver had been a non-Muslim. Would this have been called a “religious dispute”?
I may be wrong, but I don’t think so.
But because the guy’s a Muslim, Nazism is deemed “religious.”
If I were a Muslim (whether of the moderate variety or the less moderate CAIR variety) I’d be outraged — and I mean seriously outraged — by this.
And do you even have to be a Muslim to be outraged? Why aren’t more people outraged that in the mainstream media, support for Hitler voiced by a Muslim is characterized as “religious”?
Or am I missing something? Is support for Hitler’s genocide against the Jews now part of mainstream Islam?
I don’t think it is.
However, I realize that most of the reporters who conflated Islam with Nazism by calling this a “religious dispute” probably weren’t consciously aware of what they were doing, because they thought they were doing something else.
How excusable it is, I don’t know. I suppose foolishness (and maybe a little elitist condescension) is better than evil.
Or do details about stuff like this really matter anymore?