Tom Joscelyn Responds to Ramzi Kassem on the Al-Alwi Case

Ramzi Kassem is bothered by the use of the words “evidence” and “intelligence” to describe statements made by other detainees concerning his client that were not weighed by the courts. This is somewhat bizarre. The DC Circuit Court itself used the word “evidence” in this context, writing in footnote 3 of its decision (emphasis added):     "The government also presented evidence that Al Alwi was a member of Osama Bin Laden's personal bodyguard force, and that he trained at al Qaeda's al-Farouq training camp. …Al Alwi did not make such admissions during his interrogations, and his counsel vigorously disputed them at the habeas hearing. In light of its finding that the account of Al Alwi's activities contained in his own statements was sufficient to justify his detention, the district court declined to evaluate the evidence supporting those additional charges." The district court previously noted that the government relied upon “a number of other Guantanamo detainees’ statements to support these allegations” – i.e., that al Alwi was a bodyguard for Osama bin Laden and trained at al Farouq. According to the courts, then, the “evidence” the government relied upon to back up these allegations came from other detainees’ statements. As for the word “intelligence,” which is the word I used, the statements in question were part of an intelligence assessment. JTF-GTMO’s intelligence professionals obviously thought the statements were noteworthy. This does not make the statements automatically true, of course, but they are certainly pieces of intelligence.