I have never said that Islam in itself is dangerous religion (at least it isn't any more so than any other), event though there is ample evidence of conflicts caused by entire Muslim communities who utilize racism and Islamophobia as tools to morally blackmail Western societies. While it's true that Muslims find it particularly difficult to adapt in Europe due to xenophobia and racism, it is also true that there is a significant contingent of the immigrant Muslim population who believe that they are entitled to special provisions and rights due to the "exceptional trait" of their religion. Whether people want to admit it or not, there is a cultural clash that, so far, has been resolved by silencing and radicalizing critics of Islam, even when their concerns are legitimate, a list of which DreamTeam has very aptly posted.
Are all Muslims evil? Well, certainly not. However, they are a problematic contingent and we cannot justify the increasing radicalism that can be observed among their files (which supposedly moderate Muslim groups rarely condemn), due to the threat that they pose to our already decreasing freedoms. Someone who hasn't been exposed to the dangers posed by these groups can hardly form an even adequate judgement regarding this situation. American Muslims are a very much diluted community without much political power; that is not, however, the case in most European countries, where a combination of xenophobia, racism, mutual ignorance and increasing waves of indoctrinated immigrants have created an ideal environment for extremism to flourish. Unfortunately, information isn't the answer anymore, and the need to establish a protocol for assimilation must be developed in order to ensure that certain groups will not endanger the freedoms and rights that everyone enjoys.
Regarding the desolation and quasi-totalitarian rule of religion in Europe, I think that placing them in a historical context is essential. Especially during the Middle Ages and beyond the schism of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, the only legitimizing power that many rulers had, not to mention the only effective bureaucratic system in place, was Christianity. Just as more sophisticated models of governance have been developed, religion has taken not only a secondary, but even a tertiary role in the lives of many people, for the simple reason that religious institutions are not useful anymore for the adequate functioning of government structures, and the post-War period, with its unprecedented economic and technological growth, has allowed many people to broaden their horizons and adopt diverging perspectives from those provided by religion. In short, Western societies have evolved.
This cannot be said about Muslim societies, where European models of governance have been created, but there isn't a fundamental division between the way in which people perceive politics, society and religion, especially because religion imposes a legislative code that cannot be challenged, as opposed to a varying set of rules the enforcement of which can only be justified through historical contextualization. We are, simply put, importing people whose perception of religion affects everything else, and who are victimized and victimize others by the exceptionalism that they have been forced to represent, and in some cases, are happy to use as a tool to attack others.
It wasn't my intention to portray all Muslims as degenerate jihadists and potential terrorists. Yet and still, they are in the midst of a perpetual conflict that will not be resolved until we can have an objective debate, instead of polarizing critics and defenders into "radical", "right wing" and "good", "tolerant" groups.
Oh, and as for my deliberately derailing topics by inserting unrelated information in them, I am yet to find out when and how I have engaged in such behaviours.
There's a spelling error in that post. 
