The Oath (2010) - full transcript

I do not represent the United States.
Uh, I represent only Salim Hamdan.

The government has alleged
that Mr. Hamdan...

has conspired with unnamed senior
leaders of Al-Qaeda to commit terrorism.

I can tell you today that these charges
are nothing short of absurd.

He took a, uh, paying job that paid $250 a
month driving for, uh, Sheikh Osama bin Laden.

I think the problem with Mr. Hamdan's case,
as I said, is one of guilt by association.

Americans, and particularly the
American government, cannot understand…

How bin Laden had farmers,
had mechanics, had, uh, cooks.

They see Mr Hamdan standing next to bin Laden
and so, therefore, he must be a terrorist.

And I look forward to exposing this, uh,
at-at the trial in May of Mr. Hamdan.

Well, as-as I said earlier,



the use of coerced confessions is one of the
fundamental problems of the Military Commissions.

And we will challenge those, the admissibility
of those statements in, uh-in open court.

The American government is terrified
of exposing, uh, the coercive methods…

That it has used against some
of the brothers in Guantanamo.

Al-Qaeda operatives who have
been close to bin Laden...

don't give interviews
on television... until now.

We went to Yemen, at the tip
of the Arabian Peninsula,

to meet a man who, for a long time,
was bin Laden's personal bodyguard.

Abu Jandal was the name by
which he was known in Al-Qaeda.

Do you think he's for real?
Do you think he is who he says he is?

I do think he is who he says he is.

What he says about events,
people, Al-Qaeda,

meshes very thoroughly
with what we know, um,

from both unclassified sources
and from classified intelligence.



How close were you to Osama
bin Laden when you were with him?

A meter to a meter and a half away at most.

And what kind of weapon
did you carry?

I had my own gun,

but there was also a special gun to be used
if Sheikh Osama bin Laden was attacked…

And we were unable to save him,
in which case, I would have to kill him.

As far as value goes, how does he compare
to most of the prisoners in Guantanamo?

Oh, I think he's probably far more important
than anybody we've got in Guantanamo...

because he had a direct exposure
to Osama bin Laden.

He's very, very knowledgeable
about the organization worldwide.

If it were up to you,
would he be locked up somewhere? Oh, sure.

Uh, any-anyone who is
as dedicated as he is,

we ought to be taking care of them
one way or another.

They're not trying to get
the government to arrest them.

Jihad circles or jihad?

Um, we've been talking about what you
called the older generation of Al-Qaeda.

Tell me about the younger generation.

What-I know they have a different
attitude sometimes, some of them anyway.

Tell me all about it-
as much as you can about that.

Yeah.

This is dangerous for you. Do you have, um,
some way of-a way of protecting yourself?

Uh, before, his nickname,
it was Abu Hamza, okay?

Then they called them-
they called him, Abu what?

Jandal. Abu Jandal.

Okay, tell me the story that's-

Change? How you got the name.

Where does the name come from?
What does it mean?

Who gave it to you?

We look forward to,
in the Military Commission's process,

uh, defending Mr. Hamdan
and proving that he is, in fact,

a driver and a mechanic,

um, before the Commission.

And with that, we can
take any of your questions.

Would you further elucidate on what you mean
by describing him as a driver and mechanic?

Well, that he's a driver and mechanic,
not a member of Al-Qaeda,

and not guilty of, uh,
materially supporting terrorism.

Does that mean you anticipate
him being acquitted here?

Um, Bill, I-I think I, uh...

What I said in court, I don't know,
an hour ago, is the case.

Uh, this trial is gonna be deficient.
Uh, it is gonna proceed.

But it's not gonna be full, open and fair
as the government has, uh-has alleged.

There are fundamental flaws
in, uh-in this system.

Um, I don't know that
I can predict an acquittal.

Swing! Ooh! Ooh!

She's a little princess.

Hamdan was very serious.

He kept on wiping his face and eyes.

I don't know if it was because he was sweating
or crying, but he did seem, um, stressed.

Some of the evidence that they're getting admitted
would not be admitted in regular federal courts.

What happened was for the last full day,

an FBI agent, who interrogated
Hamdan at great length,

testified about all of the top Al-Qaeda
figures that his defendant knew.

Obviously, one of the biggest surprises
in the opening statement was saying that,

uh, Hamdan knew about the target
of the fourth airplane.

Is the family coming?

No. Any member of the family?

No.

We-We have videotapes
that, uh-that I took in Yemen.

But, uh,

we were unable to arrange for their
personal presence for, uh-for depositions.

We'd, of course, requested
his wife to be here.

We were informed that because she's married to
someone who is accused of terrorism, she can't come.

Sir, would you mind standing behind the
podium, I mean right-just for the sound byte.

Sure, sure. Thanks.

Okay. I don't have any statements. So if anybody
has any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

Is there some sort of sense of
embarrassment by the prosecution…

That your first big case...

is the lowest possible seeming type
of functionary in Al-Qaeda?

Why is this the first case?

Uh, no, there's no sense
of embarrassment.

We have never suggested
that he was higher than he ist.

He is a war criminal.

We will establish that
he is a war criminal.

The jury will make its decision.

Should the jury
return a verdict of guilty,

then the jury will consider all of the evidence
that's been admitted already on the merits.

He's not the lowest possible person,
that's for sure.

It's hard to think about
exactly who could be lower, but-

Do you know if in Nuremberg,

the enterprise was dedicated toward
prosecuting people of this type?

We welcome the analogies.

And we sure welcome you to place the rules of
Nuremberg against the rules that we're following here.

And you will find these rules to be much more
robust, much more friendly to the defense,

much more advanced,
considerably more due process.

In my opinion, the most just…

War crimes trial
that anybody has ever seen.

Would you say yes, I would-

To participate in that-
Yeah, in this operation?

She's asking now-

He said no.

If Osama bin Laden asked him
to participate, he would not.

Why?

Ah.

Give me specifics.

So one would come-They just traveled
for two weeks, and you would see them?

Which one?

The American people, by and large,

don't know the name bin Laden,

but they soon likely will.

Do you have a message
for the American people?

I don't think that you're gonna
get any more than, uh-

than that-that there
was a missed opportunity-

I-I said squandered opportunity,
and that's accurate.

We don't know much about the jurors.

From what you know about them,

do you think whatever
that squandered opportunity was...

is going to have an Impact
on their deliberations?

Is it something that they would,
and should, take into consideration?

They would, and should,
take it into consideration, yes.

I-It goes directly to his intent,
whether or not he is a Al-Qaeda warrior…

Or whether or not
he's a salaried driver...

who, uh,

provided valuable intelligence
to the United States...

on bin Laden's whereabouts,
operations, safe houses-

valuable information,
uh, in a timely manner.

I think that it was very important
for us to get out that information,

and that's what we did
in that closed session.

And, uh, it's my hope,
as I said the other day,

that eventually...

you and the American public can, uh-can find out
exactly what that squandered opportunity was.

Mmm.

Mr. Soufan, thank you
for being with us.

Thank you, sir.

From my experience,
I strongly believe…

That It is a mistake to use what has become
known as enhanced interrogation techniques.

These techniques,
from an operational perspective,

are slow, ineffective, unreliable…

And harmful to our efforts
to defeat Al-Qaeda.

An example of
a successful interrogation…

Is that of Al-Qaeda terrorist
known as Abu Jandal.

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11,

together with my partner,
Special Agent Robert McFadden,

we obtained a treasure trove of
highly significant actionable intelligence…

That proved instrumental in the war
efforts against Al-Qaeda and Taliban…

In the fall of 2001.

It included extensive information…

On everything from Osama bin Laden's
network and modus operandi…

To details on individual operatives,

some we later apprehended.

The approach we used
was completely by the book.

The interrogator
uses a combination…

Of interpersonal, cognitive
and emotional strategies…

To extract the information needed.

If done correctly, this approach
works quickly and effectively…

Because it outsmarts the detainee,

using a method that he is not trained,
nor able, to resist.

The approach is in sharp contrast
of the enhanced interrogation method.

I stood up then for the same reasons
I'm willing to take on critics now-

because I took an oath swearing
to protect this great nation.

The jury found Salim Hamdan not guilty…

On the most serious charge
of conspiracy to commit murder,

and they found him guilty
on five counts out of eight…

On the other charge of providing
material support to terrorism.

At the end of the verdict,
Mr. Hamdan broke down into tears.

And after we spoke
to a defense lawyer,

he said this was because Mr. Hamdan didn't
understand what exactly was going on.

He just heard the word
“guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty“...

and didn't realize that actually
some of it was “not guilty.“

The members applied the law,

and I think they reached
a just verdict in that sense.

And the problem, I understand-
the problem is...

that the law was specifically written
after the fact...

to target Mr. Hamdan,

and that's where you lose justice.

If there was justice, Mr. Hamdan would
have been completely acquitted today.

But that's not
the members' fault.

They did the job
they were given to do,

and we'll try and get justice
tomorrow in sentencing.

I point out that there were acquittals
at the Court of Star Chamber as well,

and I don't think that anyone today
would say that, uh,

the Court of Star Chamber
is a model of justice.

And in fact,
many of the abuses of that court…

Resulted in
the Habeas Corpus Act of 1640…

And, ultimately, 150 years later,
our Fifth Amendment,

which doesn't apply here
in Guantanamo Bay.

To a complete outsider,
it is very interesting to see...

that somebody from the American
military can be defending people...

who are, you know, alleged
to have had a role in Al-Qaeda.

I think it's important
for the United States, uh,

to provide these men
with a fair trial.

And I think this was a unique opportunity
that I was asked to, uh-to participate in-

uh, to defend, in essence,
the Constitution itself,

um, the fundamental values
that are core to, uh-

to American society.

Um- and that's really what
is at stake in these trials.

Uh-Go ahead.

Oh. We're on? Yeah.

Do you want me to ask you a question? No,
no, no.

I'll just make a couple
quick comments. Right.

Well, as we've seen here over the past
several weeks, Mr. Hamdan did, in fact,

receive a full and fair trial.

He was found guilty
of material support to terrorism,

five specifications of eight
that he was charged with.

And as we can see, the Military
Commissions process is moving forward.

Well, no, uh, if you could answer.

So a lot of people are saying the most
serious charges he was not found guilty on,

and if he had been charged in 2004, the
material support didn't even exist as a charge,

so this is not good
for the government.

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 clearly codified
what the role of military commissions would be,

and we stand by
the panel's decision.

We respect the decision,
and we're gonna move forward.

He was convicted of
material support to terrorism,

and, uh, we're gonna
respect that decision.

Mr. Hamdan, um, got off.

He thanked, uh, the jury,
uh, the judge, his defense team.

So a very emotional,
dramatic moment for this verdict,

which is much more lenient
than most people expected.

Uh, a question for Mr. Swift.

I noted in your closing arguments,
you've been with this case for five years.

How do you feel about this-
the jury's-

the verdict
and then the sentencing?

How does that make you feel as, uh, being one
of the persons on his defense team the longest?

When I came down
to Guantanamo Bay,

I fully expected
to meet someone like KSM.

I had no expectation of meeting
somebody like Salim Hamdan,

somebody the jury met
over the last three weeks.

The most difficult moments for me…

Would be the things that I would see,
I would wonder,

will anyone ever see this person?

Will they know
who this man really is?

This gracious, kind-

He made some mistakes,
but he was a gracious, kind...

guy-

And we saw it.

It's marvelous at the end,
where you see him spontaneously stand up-

I've never seen that-

and thank and apologize
at the same time.

And that's Mr. Hamdan.

In some of the secret testimony,
it seemed that you suggested…

That he perhaps was
supplying information…

Beyond what you described in public…

To help the Americans
try to find Osama bin Laden.

Is he safe to return to Yemen?

I hope so, Bill.

I hope so.