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 revival of religions and political fanaticism in recent times, the idea that we may be, once again, facing a new era, this time far more frightening than previous predictions: the age of hyperterrorism . The discourse on the nature of contemporary terrorism reveals the existence of different points of view among its specialists. Most scholars believe that current terrorism is fundamentally different from classical and traditional terrorism, primarily because of the substitution of a number of key elements for others. According to Wilkinson (2000, p. 5), in the late 1970s, terrorist groups had secular objectives. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayFor comparison, in the 1990s, a third of terrorist groups were religiously motivated, in most cases based on Islamist beliefs. Religious fanaticism is considered a state of risk, mainly in terms of suicide attacks and the use of technologies of mass destruction. Laqueur (2004) describes hyperterrorism as a form of brutal demonstration which responds to floating violence, which today focuses on radical Islamism, but which can at any time revolve around another ideology or 'another set of motivations. He draws attention 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 follow endless waves and is therefore optimistic about the evolution of the problem of radical Islam (Laqueur, 2004, At 20). These methods would be more recent social and technological changes than a restructuring of terrorism itself. As other groups and sectors have adapted to new means and forms of international relations, terrorist groups have also adapted to adopt or avoid certain aspects of these new circumstances. It would be more appropriate to speak of a despicable terrorism rather than a new terrorism. Regarding the hypertrophied version, it should be noted that hyperterrorism remains the only hypothesis, even if it is possible, a hyperbole based on the simultaneous increasing hypertrophy of many defining characteristics of terrorism of all and not only with respect to concerns weapons. used, the choice of civilian targets.