Quote Originally Posted by GorTex6
Was the cell driven by money, exploiting unemployment? Was membership/employment solicited on internet message boards(like this one)? Did each group set their differences aside to collude with each other autonomously? This is not new?
My statement was regarding the operational concept of a step-by-step cell, in either an operations or support context. The basic organizational method of breaking down tasks for execution by different elements separated from each other for security purposes is as old as the hills. Simple and straightforward.

The economic aspect is also as old as the hills. It doesn't take much of study to learn how unemployment - fused with socio-political pressures and other economic factors - tends to have a significant effect upon recruiting for radical organizations.

Aspects of recruiting, elements of clandestine communications, degree of collaboration between disparate organizations, etc. are initially worked out according to the degree of experience and training possessed by the leadership - not to mention significantly influenced by the perceived threat to the organization(s) in question. Tactics, techniques and procedures are never static, always evolving, and are shaped by both culture and techology - but "old" methods that have worked well for a wide variety of other organizations throughout the history of clandestine terror and insurgency are to be ignored at one's peril. We have seen clearly the readiness of the bad guys to return to older TTPs if they believe they will be effective in a new context.

What is relatively "new" is the manner in which modern communications technology provides innovative methods for establishing and running such cells. Standing them up in a more dispersed manner than possible using more traditional methods of clandestine communications, and - if done in a truly professional manner - with a greater degree of security. But a cut-out is still a cut-out, a dead-drop is still a dead-drop - whether it is physical or digital, or a combination of the two. It shouldn't confuse a good analyst.

However, that has nothing to do with the basic organizational structure of a step-by-step cell. If any intel analyst has trouble recognizing that structure, or believes it is "new", then shame on him. Recognize the structure, learn how it functions in its current context - which is what you are really referring to - then roll up the cell. Hopefully, their security and discipline is poor enough that we can exploit that cell to attack higher up in the organization. Unfortunately, a step-by-step cell is designed (or is supposed to be...) expressly to defeat that sort of exploitation.