Sayfullo Saipov, an Uzbek migrant who was involved in a terror attack in Manhattan, has said that he did as part of his work with ISIS to impose an “Islamic State”:
An Uzbek immigrant who was charged with mowing down and killing eight people with a truck in New York City has spoken out about the Islamic State (IS) extremist group at a court hearing.
Despite a warning from the judge that what he said could be used against him, Sayfullo Saipov on June 22 told the court through an interpreter that “the judgments that are made here are not important for me. They are not Allah’s judgments.”
“The Islamic State, in order to impose Shari’a (Islamic law) on Earth, is leading a war,” he said. The war is not to gain land or oil, he said, but to “impose Shari’a on Earth.”
Saipov’s unusual outburst lasted about 10 minutes. He said would have more to say “in the future.”
Saipov has previously told law enforcement agents that he was inspired by IS to rent a truck last October and use it to kill pedestrians on a bike path only blocks away from where New York’s Twin Towers once stood.
The extremist group days after the attack, on October 31, claimed Saipov as a “soldier of the caliphate.”
Because his remarks in court could be interpreted as conceding guilt only minutes after Saipov pled not guilty to murder charges through his lawyer, U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick interrupted Saipov to read him his constitutional rights, including that anything he said in court could be used against him in his trial.
“I understand you, but I’ m not worried about that at all,” said Saipov, who was born in Uzbekistan but immigrated to the United States and became a U.S. citizen.
Saipov spoke after the court had set an October 7, 2019, date for his trial.
While Saipov was speaking, Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Houle interrupted to say the prosecution objected to the judge letting him make such a statement in court.
The judge said he believed Saipov was nearing the end of his remarks and let him finish before warning him that he would not likely be allowed to speak out in court again the same way.
Saipov, though, would be given a chance to testify if his case proceeds to trial and, if convicted, could speak at sentencing, the judge said.
Prosecutors had asked for an April 2019 trial date, with Houle saying the families of the dead and the more than a dozen people who were injured deserve a “prompt and firm trial date.”
Defense lawyers have said Saipov is prepared to plead guity if the government agrees to giving him a life sentence in prison rather than the death penalty. Prosecutors said they still have not decided whether to seek the death penalty.
U.S. President Donald Trump called for Saipov to be executed shortly after the attack, which he has cited in seeking to end a lottery program for immigrants that Saipov used to gain his U.S. citizenship.
David Patton, a lawyer for Saipov, said if prosecutors seek the death penalty, he will need extra time to prepare the case, gathering information from overseas as well as in the United States.
Before the attack, Saipov had lived for several years in the United States working as a professional driver after arriving from Uzbekistan in 2010.
Saipov’s family told RFE/RL’s Uzbek Service that he did not have radical views before he moved to the United States, and appeared to have been radicalized through online sources.
A defense attorney on June 22 said Saipov has had only telephone contact with his mother, father, and sister in Uzbekistan since his arrest because they cannot get approval to travel to the United States.
Saipov also has a wife and three children. (source)
When this attack happened, I wrote an article entitled Enough Talk About Uzbekistan And Calling Her An ‘Oppressive’ State Already, This Is All About Making Propaganda In Setting Up For A War With Russia in which I stated that the entire attack was suspicious, as part of setting up for a war with Russia because Uzbekistan, due to its history with Russia and Turkey as well as the CIA and Israel is an important chess piece in the game of geopolitics. If you have not yet read my analysis, please read it here.
ISIS has been confirmed to be a US-government funded terrorist group. It is a known fact that the US government has funded terror groups as a part of its foreign policy for decade, and it makes consistent use of “false flag” attacks in order justify military incursions, mostly for economic reasons. ISIS is no exception. As we have noted in previous articles:
ISIS is a project of the CIA who has worked with the Saudis to facilitate her creation. (source)
ISIS propaganda was created chiefly by the CIA with extensive and lucrative contracts with major companies who serve the military-industrial complex. (source)
Major leaders of ISIS were trained by the CIA. (source)
The US Government has meetings with high-level ISIS leaders, and will then slaughter soldiers who fight against ISIS. (source)
The CIA build the bunkers which ISIS used to protect itself. (source)
ISIS is a US Government project that is funded as a part of its war against the Russians, a continuation of the Cold War that never ended in spite of public claims.
Central Asia right now is in the middle of a power struggle between the Russians and the USA. The USA has for decades, going back to the beginning of the history of the CIA, funding Islamic terrorist groups in Russia and the Central Asian republics. Russia wants peace not because per se she is peace-loving, but because of her size and territory as well as population decline, peace is the only domestic and foreign policy that makes sense if she wants to survive and not be split up in the literal sense.
Immediately following the Saipov case in November 2017, there were calls by the US ambassador for “anti-terrorism” training in Uzbekistan. This is but a cover to inject a greater US presence into Central Asia to try and divide Russia and her territories.
The fact that Saipov now says he did it for “ISIS” is a clear sign that this is more than just ANOTHER MUSLIM DOING AN ISLAMIC TERROR ATTACK. Even if he genuinely intended to do this for ISIS, the reality is that the attack is, in the most generous case, simply being used to promote anti-Russia postures in preparation for the Third World War that is being constructed.
However, given the questionable nature of the attack, that the USA has a long history of staging or allowing attacks to happen in order to justify long-term policy goals, and the fact that the attacker used a paintball gun and a B-B gun in his attack, one cannot help but look at the situation and suspect that this is far more than just a Muslim who was inspired by Islamic theology or a mere incident being used by the USA that happened in a wholly organic matter.
Islamic terrorism is real and a genuine threat. However, the Islamic religion’s unstable and evil nature that reduces a man’s intellect to the level of an animal historically makes it the target of governments who, seeing the effects is has on a population, to use it to enlarge their own power at the expense of the Muslims and eventually, the governments themselves.