A perspective from India, which to me is probably the most reasonable thing I have read on the Charlie Hebdo attacks:
I might add that it is not necessarily bigoted (but often may be) to assign some responsibility for fundamentalist abuses to the moderate majority whom the radicals claim to defend. If someone goes out and kills in my name, I may not be responsible for the act, but I am kind of responsible for denouncing that fundamentalist motive which is centered on me as soon as possible (preferably before the motive leads to violent action). If one finds himself passively in a conflict it is simply not possible to remain passive about it. Even declaring neutrality is an active stance. To ask that moderate Muslim communities take an active stance against or at least separating themself from the fundamentalist abuses that happen in their name is not in itself bigoted, it is perfectly normal and would be required of any person.