The classification level of information is determined by confidentiality of the information's source. This is done to protect deeply embedded or highly technical means of information gathering.
For example, information that could have only come from the second in command of some organization would require the highest of security classifications whereas information that could have come from any dozens of members of that organization would only require a confidential or secret classification.
Information is required to be classified at the lowest possible level, a guideline that is both taught and enforced throughout most if not all of the Intelligence Community.
source: I was an intelligence analyst for 6+ years.
Wonder how much that has to do with overlap between the two.
Today's terrorist may well have been yesterday's informat, and may well be an informant again tomorrow.
After all, the CIA was deeply involved in Afghanistan back when the USSR was fighting there. And many of the people that the CIA supported then later turned against USA.
And round and round it goes. Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker every time.
If I didn't know any better, I'd say that we are being primed for the CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists, in order to combat Russian influence in the Middle East. Again.
Even Trump is beginning to understand some of this. It's just a shame so many people in Khan Sheikhoun had to die first.
Substantiate your claim.
"CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists"
This is tiresome, just because US govt allies with Muslims that Russia calls terrorists doesn't make them so. In fact, last time I checked Russia works on the ground with Hezbollah, a designated terrorist group. This argument can easily go sideways for people hoisting it up as a mantra.
Right. They aren't bad dudes like ISIS, they are just, ah, al-Qaeda's Syrian arm. They are totally on the level.
> This is tiresome, just because US govt allies with Muslims that Russia calls terrorists doesn't make them so.
That's true. Just because Russia says they are terrorists doesn't make them terrorists. And, perhaps, using car bombs, suicide attacks, assassinations, and forced conscription of child soldiers doesn't make them terrorists either.
Strangely enough, all of this seems to be sufficient for the the United States to also designate them to be an islamic terrorist organization. [2] (And then issue diplomatic protests when Russia bombs them.)
[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-seeks-parliaments-approva...
US has literally never complained when Russia has bombed Nusra. People complain when Russia bombs people then calls them ISIS/AQ. Inanimate grain silos? IS oil facilities according to RU MoD. Hospitals? Nusra strongholds according to RU MoD.
This is what people complain about. If you want to say otherwise please substantiate your claim.
"Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker"
Who is the sucker here?
The classic military view of secrecy is time-limited. "Where the ship was last week is unclassified. Where the ship was yesterday is confidential. Where the ship is now is secret. Where the ship will be tomorrow is top secret." The opposition will eventually find out what you're planning on doing. The goal is for them to find out the hard way, when incoming fire starts hitting them.
The intelligence community has a longer-term view. "We know, and they know. We think they don't know that we know they know. We hope they don't know how we found out that they know." This protection of sources mindset leads to things being kept secret long after all involved parties know.
The anti-terrrorism community has adopted the intelligence community mindset. This is a problem.