Jeffrey Sachs: The US has been involved with Jihadists for over 45 years, it has no credibility

Transcription of Jeffrey Sachs’ speech, referring to the last terrorist attack in Moscow, his relations with ISIS and the USA and who would be their real organizers and executors.

Watch Professor Jeffrey Sachs’ speech at the end of the article.

Transcription:

“The United States has been involved with jihadists for more than 45 years. This dates back to the era of Zbigniew Brzezinski, who used Middle Eastern jihadists to fight in Afghanistan as a strategy to attract the Soviet Union to that country in 1979. Brzezinski explained this strategy in a famous interview with Le Nouvel Observateur in 1998, confirming that, Yes, the US used jihadists for this purpose.

After that, the US continued to recruit al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, and other associates in different parts of the world. In Syria, when Obama sent the CIA to overthrow Assad, who were the jihadists used? How credible is the US government regarding the information, revealed 55 minutes after the attack, that this was done by ISIS-K? A. How credible is this information? B. What, in your opinion, is ISIS-K?

Nothing the US government says about this is credible, as they are known for constantly lying, especially about issues of this nature. So while it may be true, the fact that the United States stated it so quickly and with such certainty after the attack makes it more unlikely that it is true. It was not mentioned that we would work with the Russians to identify those responsible for this heinous crime. On the contrary, it was stated that, practically within minutes, it was not Ukraine, but ISIS-K. We know how it was done.

This raises many more questions than it answers. However, we know that the United States has been involved in jihadist terror for decades. They did this in the Balkans, in the United States, in Central Asia and, quite possibly, in Ukraine, through some intermediary. Therefore, no statement made by the United States government can be considered proof of anything. In fact, in my opinion, it has no relevance.

We hope to get more information from Russia. Is there any connection between Victoria Nuland’s terrible statement, made two weeks before her departure, that President Putin should expect some surprises, and this recent tragedy at the Security Council? Of course, we can’t say that for sure, but it’s a possibility. The actions of the United States should never be accepted as absolute truth. This is the first principle to understand United States foreign policy, which has a dark and profound side. Victoria Nuland has always been part of this.

When she spoke of “nascent surprises”, what did she mean? It could be referring to the use of American munitions against civilian populations in Russia, something that has been happening over the past two weeks. And for the United States, the same is happening.

In a two-week span, this could indicate the possibility of some kind of terrorist attack that they were aware of or explicitly knew about. Who knows? The truth will not be revealed by the United States about any of these events. However, that doesn’t mean we won’t discover the truth.

With Russia having captured those responsible alive and now, apparently, with future information developed together with Turkey, as has been explained in the last 24 hours, I am sure we will hear a lot more about this.”

Via @upholdreality