Not at all. Let's look at the analogy from a different angle. How many Jews who eat pork are not circumcised? How many Christians women who think adultery is wrong support divorce, even though Jesus clearly and distinctly says that a woman who divorces is an adulteress? People pick and choose what they want to follow. And that's not even going into the people I've met who use purposeful ignorance to skirt the rules (e.g., not asking what's in the food so they can pretend it doesn't contain forbidden ingredients -- I've seen Jews and Hindus do that). Jihad is more integral to Islam than not eating pork. It is a central tenant.
That ignores the question of what, exactly, "jihad" is to a particular Muslim and whether particular Muslims treat it as a central tenant of their own personal faith.
Muslims are bad people. I do not trust any of them.
I know Muslims who aren't bad people. The line between good people and bad people does not map neatly to any religious, racial, or ethnic lines. You can find good and bad in any group.
You may (or may not) find this article and this article on stereotyping interesting. No, they don't condemn it all and actually explain why it's useful. But pay particular attention to the sections in the Derbyshire article under the headings "Item: People ascribe a stereotype to everybody in the subject group." and "Item: Stereotypes blind us to individual characteristics." That's where I have a problem with what you are saying. You are doing what Derbyshire says reasonable people don't do.