September 11, 2001, saw the founding of a new Bush Administration policy and a change of regime in the United States. Taking advantage of the international shock provoked by the terrorist attacks, the fight against terrorism has enabled the justification of most of the actions carried out by Washington. This has been based on a definition of terrorism created by the propagandists of the Bush Administration, which currently has the consensus of the Western media. From isolated action methods and groups - often lacking resources - the media have portrayed a solid and united organization, that can be compared with Islamism - and even Islam -, with many ramifications around the world and that gains strength due to the despair produced by tyrannies. This definition enables the justification of the “democratization” of the “Great Middle East” or the setting up of military bases in any place where “terrorism” may develop. In the domestic field, the terrorist threat allows for the implementation of anti-freedom legislations and strengthens the control structures of the population.
Rollie Lal, a researcher with the Rand Corporation, participates in this presentation of an unlimited terrorist threat in the International Herald Tribune where she affirms that the terrorist networks are increasingly more linked to the networks of international crime. Progressively, by giving an ideological nature to the criminal activities and by the use of classic criminal methods to finance terrorist actions, these groups could even become only one. In this context, the war on terrorism should be linked to the war against criminality and the structures that today separately fight these two phenomena should unite. As most of the countries have already implemented extraordinary legislations to fight terrorism, their extension to all judicial fields is what is implicitly demanded. This vision of a tentacular and mortal terrorism is what allows Louis René Beres, an International Law professor and president of the Project Daniel, to recommend - in the Washington Times- that Israel radicalizes even more its anti-terrorist fight. Thus, he recommends that the Sharon government increases assassinations of “terrorists” and even to promote those responsible for the executions to the Israeli government. In sum, run the state on the basis of assassination, of course, in legitimate defense.
The former advisor for the anti-terrorist struggle of the Bush and Clinton administrations, Richard A. Clarke, does not go so far in the New York Times and in El Periódico as to the reform of the US intelligence services. In an open letter to John Negroponte, director of these services, he recommends dividing the CIA in a two services: one of analysis and another of espionage; and also suggests getting rid of the tutelage of Donald Rumsfeld in regards to matters of military intelligence. The post held by John Negroponte was recently created and it offers exceptional and exceptionally extensive powers, without any precedents in American history, to the former organizer of death squads in Central America. Right-hand man of Donald Rumsfeld, he should facilitate the extension of his authority to the civilian services, and that is what Clarke fears.
For his part, judge Richard A. Posner considers in Los Angeles Times that the reform of the intelligence services has to be gradual. The intelligence services are currently reproached for faults that are inherent to them. In thinking that they can be changed, one takes the risk of damaging the tool. In an interview with the daily Le Monde, the director of the DST (the French counter-espionage service), Pierre de Bousquet, offers his point of view about “Jihadism” in France. In his opinion, they are heterogeneous groups that may or may have not been created abroad. He says he does not fear a massive bio-terrorist attack. Then, we are far from the idea of an Al-Qaida-like organized, unified and well-equipped Islamic network spread across the United States. In addition, he rejects the hypothesis according to which the military alternative would be good to fight a terrorist phenomenon that continues to be an issue for the legal system. On the contrary, he is glad because the French are not shocked by the exception laws used in the war on terrorism and, consequently, the wide margin of action they give to his service. In addition, soon, the DST will be in the same facilities than the services of General Intelligence. Thus, France is witnessing a centralization phenomenon like in the United States although the justification is different.

The media representation of terrorism is linked to an ideological presentation of the Arab populations living in the Middle East, and also in Europe.
In Der Spiegel, Ayaan Hirsi Alí, the Dutch Parliament member of Somali origin who worked with Theo Van Gogh, she gives an image of local Muslims with no shades. She believes that Islamism is an important threat for the western values that spreads within immigrant populations. In addition, she offers an essentialist vision of these populations: badly integrated, they do not speak Dutch and they do not want to mingle with the others, they do not tolerate any criticism of Islam... Thus, she defends a forced integration of immigrants in Holland.

Finally, the uncle of King Abdallah of Jordan, Hassan bin Talal, opposes his pro-American nephew in Vremya Novostyey, where he denounces the consequences of the policies of the Bush Administration in this artificial regional entity called the “Great Middle East”. The states take advantage of the US’s carte blanche in the war on terrorism to fight their opposition and at the same time they accept the “democratization” measures demanded by Washington. Thus, by saying that democracy is supported from abroad, they are obstructing the creation of a true internal democratic movement. In the meantime, the presence of the United States in the region is catastrophic as it obstructs regional integration for economic development and replaces it with a series of bilateral relations with Washington.