Who is the most threatening terrorist?

What can the world, especially India and the US learn from Abdulmutallab's attempted bombing of an American flight on Christmas day? The media are speculating whom to blame, how to approach this issue, and the pseudo-seculars must already be planning their defences.

Take an example what Time magazine has to say about lessons to be learned: '...There are four different U.S. terrorism databases, and yet Abdulmutallab's name never rose above the least threatening one.'

The CIA apparently has about four different levels of databases where the bottom-most imply the least threatening. So Abdulmutallab's remained there.

What should've happened? If the CIA had taken custody of Adbulmutallab and investigated him then the whole media would have cried hoarse about victimisation, human rights groups would have been up in arms and well, yet another Hindi film would have been made about racial profiling of 'innocent Muslims' in New York. (with some colourful songs of course)

Nobody, just nobody, no media house, none of the 24/7 channels, and no film maker and none of the pseudo-secularists ask this question: Why does the Muslim community, especially the Muslim leaders across the world go quiet over terrorism committed in the name of their god? Why, on the other hand, the community turns most vociferous, most vocal and shows envious unity over a wrong cartoon or an obscure documentary, chooses not to bother about it? WHY?

The Independent had an article where a laments that Islamic societies in the UK universities gather and spread radical ideas to their member students. He quotes a recent incident where a preacher was brought to an Islamic society of a London university advocated murdering homosexuals. A reverent doing so would have made front-page news in the UK. Why should we tolerate such atrocities not permitted for Hindu or Christian groups?

How are we going to make a terror suspect travel from the least-threatening database to the most-threatening one? What are the acceptable parameters? What are the human rights limitations to that? And who decides what those limits are?

More and more such incidents go to prove that Islamic terrorism is a global problem for all the secular, (read secular not pseudo-secular) democratic and non-Islamic countries. It has to be addressed seriously and aggressively.

When it comes to Islamic terrorism, there are no least-threatening databases.