Thanks, I have read the whole topic and it did contribute a lot to my general understanding of the situation and how people feel about it.
To add a little to that, and my opinion is less informed than others on this forum, I think the survey you mentioned seems at least a little overstated. In my personal experience, many Muslims from many different schools of thought (and not just the Wahabbi's) were indeed sympathetic to the implementation of an alternative to capitalism, to sharia even, and to the blossoming of the Ummah (even in the West), so that it could stand up to the perceived oppression and stifling it had been subjected to by the West, by America, by the Jews, by the Freemasons, and by every other shadowy enemy that existed out there, that made it their mission to suppress and take the sheen off the one noble and enlightening truth in the world: true Islam.
However, from what I have seen, almost all everyday Muslims have now backtracked from this viewpoint. The process for doing this possibly started at 911. Those that were not in denial about the perpetrators at the time, and their motive for the slaughter, started to feel a little uncomfortable at the practicalities and consequences of actually being sympathetic towards returning to the golden age of Islam. This process continued, and with every awful, inhumane act, more and more Muslims shied away from holding views that were not too dissimilar to the views that young radicals held before they crossed the line of madness, that separates ordinary people from being bent and destructive killers. The emergence of the Islamic State itself has finally helped complete the process of polarising Muslims in general. The vast majority can now see, in a way that is completely undeniable to them, that the literal implementation of Sharia is completely unacceptable. They see the barbarity in IS as clearly as you see it. They see the injustice, the oppression, and the inhumanity of it all, exactly as you see it. They are therefore now dealing with their cognitive dissonance in their own individual ways, and not just grasping at the nearest conspiracy theory to help them reconcile their perfect religion with the less than perfect actions of some who are driven by it. Most therefore, in my opinion, are moving away slightly from literalism, and towards the good, spiritual, charitable and loving aspects of Islam. And the small minority that don't take this majority view: well, you see those guys on the news, so I don't need to tell you about them.
To sum up what I intended to be a very short post: in my opinion, you have a lot less to fear than you think, from Muslims. Islam itself can obviously be dangerous in the wrong hands, but we're all hoping that it gets taken out of those hands very quickly, and into the hands of our very own lovely and spiritual family members, friends and neighbours.
What you have written here is something I suspected is happening. I can see how ISIS could be viewed as a catalyst, it will ultimately divide people into those who reject certain ideas and those who embrace them. I sometimes like to entertain two or more contradictive ideas in my head and I can see how the whole concept of Islam worldwide can be attractive to some. Especially if one is devoted to it and believes that this is what they live for, this is the ultimate truth, hovering above anything else. The question I have in mind is how small is this small minority of fundamentalists and believers in literal Quran? I guess they are the people who are most vunerable for radicalisation. All there is needed is a charismatic character that has an answer for all your questions (A. Choudary for example, who I believe would be much much bigger if he preached to people directly touched by war, in Middle East, not Brits living under democratic government)
As always - numbers is all that matters. A silly idea with 10 believers is just silly. A silly idea with millions of believers is a real power.
On the refugee issue.
The vast majority of the people now entering Greece are refugees not economic migrants. Not that I've got anything against economic migrants. For the most part I'm in favour of people being able to travel and live where they want, whether they're refugees or not. But the clear reality is that Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans fleeing war zones are refugees by any reasonable definition.
Migration doesn't necessarily fit with definitions of refugees. I was living in Greece when the Berlin Wall came down, the border with Albania opened up and civil war started in Yugoslavia. Hundreds of thousands of people entered Greece over a couple of years, the greatest numbers coming from Albania, Yugoslavia and Poland, I think in that order. The Albanians were fleeing from poverty and a brutalised society, but as the regime had collapsed I'm not sure if that made them refugees. Many of the Yugoslavs were avoiding conscription into one or other army, deserting, or taking time out from war. I don't think the EU saw this as any reason to grant asylum or refugee status, a position I thought and still think is absurd. The people from Poland were in Greece to work and for the novelty of being able to travel, which were obviously motivations for the Albanians and Yugoslavs as well. In hindsight Greece was doing quite well at the time and East Europeans were willing to do the jobs Greeks didn't want.
People who came to Greece from Poland in the early 90s were economic migrants. People escaping from Assad or IS now are refugees. The difference is clear, but in any case I was in favour of freedom of movement then and I'm in favour of it now. In practice Greece wasn't and isn't in any real position to control entry so the EU's and your views on who should allowed in are a bit academic.
Thanks for your reply. In this case, those young men who are arriving now are the ones who want to avoid conscription? Why Germany? Purely for economic reasons? Tbh, that would be my choice too if I was in that situation...
I don't have any crystallised views on this matter as I don't have enough data, I'm basing on what I read and see and try to "unbias" all the biased crap which is everywhere online. What I see though, is that most hate towards immigration comes from ignorant or uneducated people. When it comes to common people in homogenous, Christian countries like Poland or Slovakia, Hungary - it is unavoidable. Those people have absolutely no idea what Islam is, they have not met many Muslims, the last one they saw was probably Morgan Freeman in Robin Hood - Prince of Thieves when on TV, Xmas time... My point is - all they hear and see in related to Muslim world is war, beheadings, bombings. They don't know anything about loving Muslim families, they have never met one. I am probably exaggerating a little bit, but it is much much worse than in more western countries where most of us know someone who is Muslim. Coped with a rise of right-wing movements - it doesn't look good.
Now, I also am for the freedom of movement, as long as you respect the culture and values of the community you are joining. I don't think this is debatable, this is just common courtesy. People in Eastern European countries fear the lack of assimilation, Sweden, France, and UK is often given as an example of a failure - whole areas, towns, districts with completely changed demography, alien culture, alien religion which most of them view as a political doctrine. It is a big deal for a country which is culturally homogenous and has no colonial history. They believe that the mainstream Islam is the fundamental Islam, and that moderate Muslims are not real Muslims. There are also economical reasons, those are not very rich countries. Here you have Polish MEP talking about it in EU's parliament:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YTe5YNHBQAHe's a right wing nutcase, but people are buying into this rhetoric.
Topic: I need to see the big picture.