And yet according to all the placards and editorials, Boko Haram is un-Islamic.

I remember a discussion when I first joined Islamicity many years ago, in which a number of Muslims declared that in any dispute between Muslims and non-Muslims, they would never take the side of the non-Muslims, even if they knew the Muslims were wrong.  I think that's what's happening.  And it's shameful.

Yes, lots of placards and editorials and words of condemnation.  What about actions?  Why is it that only non-Muslim nations are offering assistance?

If this were a silly cartoon or low-budget movie ridiculing Muhammad, there would be diplomatic repercussions and economic sanctions and death threats and worse.  But nothing brings Islam more into disrepute than terrorism committed in its name.  Why is there no official response from Muslim political leaders?

Your first link, to the VOA article, quotes Muslim leader Faisal Suliman as accusing the "mainstream media" of linking this atrocity to Islam.  But it's not the media making this link.  It's Boko Haram, and very explicitly.  Why isn't there a fatwa against Boko Haram?

Ron Webb wrote: WORLD RISES AGAINST BOKO HARAM Britain, China, France, Canada join US to offer assistance in communications, logistics, intelligence planning DAYS of terror in Nigeria may be over soon as countries of the orld have joined forces to end the menace of Boko Haram and, as well, help rescue the abducted schoolgirls of Government Secondary School, Chibok, Borno State. ... My question is simple.  Why are there no Muslim countries offering assistance?  Why does the Muslim world leave it up to outsiders control their own extremists?

A very good question.