Yes, though to a certain extent I can understand why some people react like that. They are quite rightly very angry about these terrorist atrocities. Many do not come from a Muslim background like us and so are not interested in 'helping' bring about change amongst Muslims - they don't have Muslim family they care deeply about. They just want to strike out at these terrorists and are less sophisticated when it comes to distinguishing between the terrorists and ordinary Muslims. They just want to express and vent their disgust, and anger at what has happened. They want to belittle, mock Muslims who they collectively hold responsible for these attacks. They want to make themselves feel better about events they feel powerless to otherwise influence..
Some extreme bigots feel they are at war with Muslims and are not the slightest bit interested in 'helping' Muslims to mature and change. They just want to give them a good kicking - and are perhaps more concerned with stopping immigrants - especially Muslim immigrants from coming to 'their' country and taking 'their' jobs. Many believe in conspiracy theories - just as much as many Muslims do - but their conspiracy theories are that Muslims are all practising Taqiiya and cannot be trusted as the moderates and extremists are all in cahoots with each other.
I would certainly hope that we here as Ex-Muslims would never make the mistake of falling in with such people.
I remember on FFI these bigoted types loved to hang around ex-Muslims - and claim them to be on their side - as they felt Ex-Muslims validate their hatred and bigotry. That's what made FFI such a cesspit.
I am very proud of this forum as we have always been able to avoid such a pitfall.
The reason this shuts them down is a bit deeper than that. It has to do with a failure of our brains, which Milgram discovered in his obedience experiments.
Here's an example I came up with to demonstrate this effect: Let's say you're a security guard on the job. You are holding a taser. You see two men running towards you. The man closest to you is clearly trying to evade the person pursuing him, who is firing a gun at him. Which of the men do you fire the taser at (let's assume you're a good shot and both men are in range), the man who is clearly running for his life, or the man who is shooting at him? Now suppose that the man with the gun is a uniformed police officer.
Nothing changed between the two scenarios besides the clothing the person with the gun was wearing, and yet it completely reverses your actions, because you instinctively trust that the police officer, an authority figure, is shooting because it is necessary. If you apply a moment's thought to this, you realize it is not always the case and you adjust your answer, but your instinct tells you to trust the authority figure.
We believe that authority figures have a reason for what they're doing, and allow that to overrule our own morality and objections. If you were able to separate the part of their brain that views Mohammad/whoever as an authority figure, they would probably agree that whatever you're talking about is wrong. But because they believe in the moral superiority of an authority figure, they will defend whatever he did, against their own moral judgement.
I wrote a blog post about this:
http://pathtokolinahr.blogspot.com/2015/01/moral-people-defending-immoral-things.html
Topic: Deadly attack on office of French magazine Charlie Hebdo