With the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the fear that scientific and technological advances, combined with the increasing availability of chemical, radiological and biological agents, and the resurgence of religious terrorism and the political fanaticism of recent times, the idea that we may find ourselves, once again, facing a new era, this time much more frightening than previous predictions: the era of hyperterrorism. The discussion on the nature of contemporary terrorism reveals the existence of different points of view among its scholars. Most academics believe that today's terrorism is essentially different from classical and traditional terrorism, fundamentally due to the replacement of a number of definitive elements with others. According to Wilkinson (2000, p. 5), in the late 1970s, terrorist groups had secular goals. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay By comparison, in the 1990s, a third of terrorist groups were religiously motivated, in most cases, based on Islamic beliefs. Religious fanaticism is seen as a state of risk especially for suicide attacks and the use of technologies of mass destruction. Laqueur (2004) describes hyperterrorism as a form of brutal manifestation that responds to a fluctuating violence, which today focuses on radical Islamism, but which at any time can be articulated around another ideology or set of motivations. Attention is drawn to the fact that in hyperterrorism violence can come from anywhere and not necessarily from religious fanatics but from anyone. Laqueur emphasizes that 100 years ago the religious problem had no relevance and that fanaticism tends to obey interminable waves and is therefore optimistic about the evolution of the problem of radical Islam (Laqueur, 2004, A 20). The methods would be more recent social and technological changes than a restructuring of terrorism proper. While other groups and sectors have adapted to new means and forms of international relations, terrorist groups have also adapted to capture or avoid aspects of this new conjuncture. It would be more appropriate to speak of despicable terrorism than of new terrorism. Regarding the hypertrophic version, it should be noted that hyperterrorism remains the only hypothesis, even if possible, a hyperbole based on the growing simultaneous hypertrophy of many of the distinctive features of terrorism of all and not only with regards to the weapons used, the choice of civilian targets.