Without conceding the oft-repeated nebulous claim that "most Muslims" in the West reject Western values, let's examine your premise.
You are right that thoughts influence actions, but the whole basis of freedom of thought and speech -- most notably implemented in the US -- is that ideas win by their own merit and don't need official protections of thought control. All ideas and principles can be challenged in a lawful manner and debated on merit. If there is a clash of ideas, or civilizations, then liberal democratic principles are strong enough to survive any challenge by competing ideas.
Who said anything about 'thought control'? Unless you are saying, despite your claim to believe in the liberal democratic principles, that to challenge the Muslims regarding the motivations for their actions qualify as 'thought control'.
The fundamental principle of law is very clear: we hold people accountable for their actions, not thoughts or ethnicity or religion.
The law hold people accountable for their actions, but we have the right to hold each other
MORALLY accountable for their thoughts, spoken or unspoken, and even actionable when necessary, as in the case of libel.
If I am of a religion that says my wife must walk 3 paces behind me, non-believers do have the right to question the morality of my religion. So even if there is no law that forbid the treatment of wives in the manner of A, B, or C, they are holding me accountable against their moralities while I treat my wife according to my religious beliefs. Like it or not, the human nature is that we first measure what we experience against what we know, then we seek understanding. But even if we understand, that does not mean we will accept what we see and experience to be on the same plane as our moralities dictate to us. In other words, we will grade all moralities and religions. That gradation is unacceptable to the Muslims. In order for one argument (idea) to 'win', its opposition must 'lose'. For a set of morality to take second place in a two man race, the believers of that set of morality will be seen as inferior, inapplicable and inappropriate to modernity. If that set of morality have a religious component, and moralities usually do, its god will also be seen as an inferior god, or worse, the moral opposite of the god that 'won' the debate.
So what we are seeing now is that the Muslims are seeking legal forbiddance of moral and intellectual challenges to Islam and consequently how Muslims act in the practice of their religion, as in 'thoughts influence actions', as you conceded. The Muslims in the countries where Islam is not the dominant religion are also carving out enclaves where they will enforce their interpretations of Islam, and often what are being enforced are contrary to the dominant moral and legal foundation allows and protects. Inside those enclaves, the Muslims are indeed rejecting Western values.
If ordinary Germans view Islam as a social threat, it is only a matter of time they will react to that threat outside of the intellectual arena. And that time is near.
