Chief Prosecutor Preet Bhahara:
“The defendant was believed to have, and did have, actionable intelligence about al-Qaeda, by virtue of his longstanding position in al-Qaeda; his assistance to known al-Qaeda terrorists; and his close relationship to long-standing al-Qaeda leaders, including Usama Bin Laden, ” Mr. Bharara wrote.
Thus, the brief continues, the U.S. “justifiably treated the defendant as an intelligence asset—to obtain from him whatever information it could concerning terrorists and terrorist plots. This was done, simply put, to save lives. And when significant intelligence had been collected from the defendant, the U.S. made the decision to continue holding him as an alien enemy combatant pursuant to the laws of war.”
in Mr. Bharara’s words, “the results of the CIA’s efforts show that the defendant’s value as an intelligence source was not just speculative.”
When Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ruled in the government’s favor, he stated that prosecutors had offered credible evidence not only that Mr. Ghailani had information essential to national security, but also that it “could not have been obtained except by putting him in that program.”
