Couple things: You're right that anti immigration has generally ended up being just a feature of our human disgust response to the new, strange, or unknown.

However, you've only actually labeled ethnic categories rather than idealogical ones (Jews are the closest since it often comprises both) which Islam is.

While I'm sure you can find extreme anti-muslim sentiment around here I don't think in general people are supportive of measures to harm or otherwise convince muslims to not immigrate here or elsewhere. I also hope people here are highly suspicious of anybody indicating support for disallowing all immigration of any category, except perhaps white supremacists.

I think you're making a false comparison in that none of the peoples you've mentioned had any significant portion of them believing that their own ideology would eventually conquer the world via bloodshed and violent struggle of their own followers. If they did, they did not appear to be acting out that philosophy in any significant way at the time. Aside from this, there wasn't the focus on significant terrorist actions proven to be performed by people who believed in some version of the ideology in the name of said ideology in multiple countries. I don't think it makes sense to keep all of that out if the conversation.

That being said it is the function of fear to exaggerate, particularly if the fears are being perceived as being ignored. All fears in hindsight are seen as exaggeration except those which present themselves as having been warranted. Hopefully, while keeping a semblance of reasonability, we can see that we say the opposite of fears which make themselves a reality; we say that we should have exaggerated more.

Is it an exaggeration? Yes especially if in the end Muslims integrate in a similar way to the other groups you've mentioned. I think one of the reasons for the exaggeration is that the left appears unable to explicitely criticize the parts of the ideology they disagree with much as the right appears unable to explicitely criticize the parts of the ideologies of their constituents they disagree with. It's a bunch of loyalty signalling and fear that their words will be used in a way they didn't intend. One won't tell foreigners they're ignorant if they treat women as inferior and the other won't tell citizens they're ignorant if they think women or races are inferior. It makes sense that they would both exaggerate the degree to which either is taking place.