what is a society that is acceptable according to BadDecker and other radical muslims, the slaughtering islamic state because it shots into everyones head if he isn't praying how ordered?
The only really acceptable society is one that allows freedom for all individuals who are adults.
The only exception is when it is proven that an individual has harmed or damaged another human or his property. The freedom is taken from the guilty person until he has paid off the debt of harm or damage.
Judgment as to guilt must be based on at least one witness besides the harmed/damaged person, and substantial evidence... and the defendant gets to cross examine the accuser and the witness.
A judge may make the judgment, but the defendant may require a jury of 12 impartial men and women.
Do Muslims have rules like this? These are the basic rules in the USA.
Seems to me that rules for Muslims are found in the Koran and Hadiths. Islamic rules promote lack of freedom, and violence at times.
read human history there is property over the means of production (equity) there is exploitation, islam is easy to handle as everyone thinks he goes to hell if he harms his fellow brothers but it can backfire, (exploitation etc.)
historically armies that go into battle in order to get into paradise aren't very good armies as they dont seek to win. islamic state terror spreads now because world is still influenced by american hedonism (liberalism) but once this turns, armies seeking to die are not good fighters anymore.
secondly what do you recommend what shall europe do with those migrants it gets from third world?
You misunderstand Islam. Their fellow brothers according to the Koran and Hadiths are fellow Muslims. Other people are infidels and can be treated in any way a Muslim wants. That's the difference between Islam and most other religions.
Generally other religions say to convert people, but don't harm them. Muslims say this too, regarding a time-period where the Muslim tries to convert the infidel. But if the infidel isn't converted, he is supposed to be executed. The execution time is a judgmental thing, based on the safety of the Muslims when they do the executing, and based on how close to Islam conversion the Infidels might be.
We all might have ideas on what Europe is to do with immigrants. You read my ideas, above. No punishment except for harm and property damage. There is one other thing that I didn't spell out in this thread. Threat. Knowing what Islam is, allowing Muslims to immigrate is accepting a threat. But what Europe does is up to them. Most of Europe is not under the non-agresion ideals I suggest. Their governments are civil law governments, which are basically like religious Islam without the religion part.
However, none of this has much to do with the points in the OP directly. So, what's your point?