# The Third Jihad-recommended viewing **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 16, 2010, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953 "2010-07-16T18:28:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/201 "2010-07-21T05:24:05Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Newsflash: the guy in question _is_ an _actual_ Muslim. Imagine that! And discussing the myriad aspects of the religion is precisely what he’s doing. Tell me, what makes him less than an actual muslim for you. What bona fides does he, in your estimation, lack. He’s a fucking narrator, of a movie about Muslims, put together by an extremely fundamentalist Jewish group. I’d basically put it in the same ballpark as you writing and producing a film about the effects of homosexuals getting married, hiring some gay guy to narrate your garbage. Or perhaps you could put together a film on illegal immigration. It might be cheaper to get an illegal immigrant to narrate that one. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/202 "2010-07-21T14:12:51Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Clearly it’s about the evil dentist jihad on cavities. So as **magellan01** has taught me, I’m being wary (whatever being “wary” actually means). I believe the offical certified **magellan01** technique is: 1. Get a list of dentists from the ADA 2. ??? 3. Safety! Warning: If you try this, PC thugs will accuse you of being a rabid anti-dentite even though you haven’t said we should do anything to the dentists. Just be, you know, wary of them. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/203 "2010-07-21T15:14:15Z")
> [@42fish](#): > > I believe the offical certified **magellan01** technique is: > > 1. Get a list of dentists from the ADA > 2. ??? > 3. Safety! > > Warning: If you try this, PC thugs will accuse you of being a rabid anti-dentite even though you haven’t said we should do anything to the dentists. Just be, you know, wary of them. Is it safe? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/204 "2010-07-21T15:22:24Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > It would behoove you to be wary of vegetarians. Hitler, Pol Pot, Charles manson… all vegetarians. I’m just saying. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/205 "2010-07-21T15:31:26Z")
I can understand the problem people have with the Hollywood version of political correctness. I don’t understand the problem people are having with the “don’t discriminate based on race or religion” part of political correctness. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/206 "2010-07-21T15:48:18Z")
Ethics and morals that I adhere to are “correct”. Ethics and morals that I _don’t_ adhere to are “politically correct”. That about cover it? ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/207 "2010-07-21T16:30:40Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > Is it safe? I don’t know. I mostly just wanted to use the phrase “rabid anti-dentite” somewhere other than a Seinfeld appreciation thread. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/208 "2010-07-21T16:45:01Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I can understand the problem people have with the Hollywood version of political correctness. I don’t understand the problem people are having with the “don’t discriminate based on race or religion” part of political correctness. It all depends what you mean by “discriminate”. Is taking into account information about religion, or race, gender, nationality, automatically “discrimination” in the sense that we abhor? Or can one use that information to assess different levels of threats, etc.? The PC line some want to take would mean that if one were to look at religion as a factor, that you’d have to assume the level of threat coming from Muslims and Quakers is the same. In fact, let me ask: does anyone think that to be the case? And I’ll pose the question another way, as well. Let’s say a car bomb is driven into a mall in New Jersey, killing 100 innocent people, including children. You have to bet $10,000 of your own money on the religion of the person responsible. Which religion do you choose? ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/209 "2010-07-21T16:56:51Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > And I’ll pose the question another way, as well. Let’s say a car bomb is driven into a mall in New Jersey, killing 100 innocent people, including children. You have to bet $10,000 of your own money on the religion of the person responsible. Which religion do you choose? I’d go with Christian–statistically speaking, there are many more Christians in the U.S. than there are any other religion, and given that there does not appear to be a showy target (i.e. the bomber just wanted to kill people) I figure it’s probably just some guy, not a big-name terrorist organization. ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/210 "2010-07-21T17:17:29Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > It all depends what you mean by “discriminate”. Is taking into account information about religion, or race, gender, nationality, automatically “discrimination” in the sense that we abhor? Or can one use that information to assess different levels of threats, etc.? The PC line some want to take would mean that if one were to look at religion as a factor, that you’d have to assume the level of threat coming from Muslims and Quakers is the same. > > In fact, let me ask: does anyone think that to be the case? > > And I’ll pose the question another way, as well. Let’s say a car bomb is driven into a mall in New Jersey, killing 100 innocent people, including children. You have to bet $10,000 of your own money on the religion of the person responsible. Which religion do you choose? Christian. There are a shit-load of them, and some of them are cracked. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/211 "2010-07-21T17:30:12Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > I’d go with Christian–statistically speaking, there are many more Christians in the U.S. than there are any other religion, and given that there does not appear to be a showy target (i.e. the bomber just wanted to kill people) I figure it’s probably just some guy, not a big-name terrorist organization. Okay. So you simply look to the the fact that there are many more Christians in the U.S., the same way you would guess the religion if the question was: a man won the lottery in NJ, what religion was he? On the other hand, you do take into consideration other information: the lack of a “showy target” (debatable as it is). But you seem to not ask an additional question that could make your bet better informed, i.e., is there a particular religion that has shown itself to have adherents that have committed similar acts? Wouldn’t it be wise to make your be be a smarter one by having it be based on additional information? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/212 "2010-07-21T17:32:24Z")
> [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](#): > > Christian. There are a shit-load of them, and some of them are cracked. See my response above. Also, both you and pedescribe ignored my other question. Here it is again for both of you: [QUOTE=magellan01] The PC line some want to take would mean that if one were to look at religion as a factor, that you’d have to assume the level of threat coming from Muslims and Quakers is the same. In fact, let me ask: does anyone think that to be the case? [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/213 "2010-07-21T18:02:56Z")
Nope. There are a lot of Christians, and some of them [are willing to kill because of their beliefs.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence_in_the_United_States#United_States) Best to be wary. I don’t think I ever stated that I was taking a PC line, whatever that is. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/214 "2010-07-21T18:09:21Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Okay. So you simply look to the the fact that there are many more Christians in the U.S., the same way you would guess the religion if the question was: a man won the lottery in NJ, what religion was he? On the other hand, you do take into consideration other information: the lack of a “showy target” (debatable as it is). But you seem to not ask an additional question that could make your bet better informed, i.e., is there a particular religion that has shown itself to have adherents that have committed similar acts? Wouldn’t it be wise to make your be be a smarter one by having it be based on additional information? No, because the evidence suggests that this act was done by a local crazy person (why else would it be in New Jersey? There are plenty of better targets). A local crazy person is statistically more likely to be Christian. Your “additional information” is not actually information pertinent to the case, but general information about the world (that may or may not be accurate). I am looking at information pertinent to the case. If the hypothetical was “Carbomb in L.A. with a note saying ‘Die infidels’”, I’d bet Islam. And, besides, what religion did Timothy McVeigh belong to? > [@Magellan](#): > > The PC line some want to take would mean that if one were to look at religion as a factor, that you’d have to assume the level of threat coming from Muslims and Quakers is the same. > > In fact, let me ask: does anyone think that to be the case? No. But you are using the fallacy of the excluded middle: there are stances between ‘Assume every religion is equally threatening’ and ‘Assume a person is a threat just because he is a Muslim’. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/215 "2010-07-21T18:13:08Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > And, besides, what religion did Timothy McVeigh belong to? Ah, but I’m sure someone will pop in to let you know that he was not a “true Christian”. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/216 "2010-07-21T18:18:29Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Ah, but I’m sure someone will pop in to let you know that he was not a “true Christian”. Which would make those other bombers not “true Muslems”. Right? ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/217 "2010-07-21T18:26:29Z")
See, here’s the thing, Magellan. I agree with you (to some extent). I agree that one can make a reasonable guess at someone’s religion based solely on their actions. For example, if all I knew about a guy was that he refused to eat pork, lived in New York, and didn’t go out on Sundays, and for some reason I had to guess at his religion, I’d guess Jewish. And it’d be silly not to. What you are doing, and what I disagree with, is assuming the converse as well. You seem to think that you can make a reasonable guess at someone’s actions based solely on their religions. But it doesn’t work that way. Given only that someone is Jewish, you shouldn’t say “Oh, he must live in New York”, because you will frequently be proven wrong and people will be mad at you for judging them before you know them. But, you ask, what is the substantial difference between the two? Surely, you say, both thought processes are just inferences based on known information? And that is true. However, in the first example, we are given a wealth of info, and infer only a meager amount. But in the latter, we start with only a meager amount, and infer a great deal. As such, the inferences are much more likely to be inaccurate. Furthermore, the (frequently incorrect) inferences in the latter would change how you treat the person. And that is the very definition of prejudice. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/218 "2010-07-21T18:33:44Z")
No, what **Magellan** , myself, and others are saying is that if a person is a Muslim and spends a lot of time listening to radical clerics spouting their hateful bullshit, doesn’t seem to have many friends other than the nutjobs s/he meets at the mosque that allows radical fuckwits to preach there, and in no way tries to integrate themselves into the society they are living in, then that person needs to be looked at with some suspicion, because they are far more likely to want to cause public harm than the muslim who doesn’t try to separate themself from society in general. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/219 "2010-07-21T18:46:32Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Which would make those other bombers not “true Muslems”. > Right? I’m not sure what a “Muslem” is. Loosely woven cotton fabric? No, that’s “muslin” Hmmmmm. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953/220 "2010-07-21T18:57:48Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > I’m not sure what a “Muslem” is. Loosely woven cotton fabric? No, that’s “muslin” Hmmmmm. A “Muslem” is no true Muslim? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-third-jihad-recommended-viewing/546953.md?page=12)