This new Glazov Gang episode is hosted by Anni Cyrus and features Hedieh Mirahmadi, an ex-Muslim, former FBI informant, and national security advisor who spent decades inside Washington’s intelligence and diplomatic apparatus.
Hedieh discusses Jihadis in Suits and she asks: Do they change their beliefs when they get dressed up?
Don’t miss it!
Subscribe to the Glazov Gang Newsletter and follow us on our YouTube and Rumble channels – and on Twitter: @jamieglazov, GETTR: @jglazov and Facebook.
Please donate via our Pay Pal account.
Also show your support for Mike Lindell and The Glazov Gang by using this link for MyPillow and save up to 65% on all your purchases!
Order Jamie Glazov’s new book, ‘Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America’: HERE.
Walter Sieruk says
There’s an old Irish wise saying , which is “Dress a goat in a suit and it’s a goat.” Likewise, it’s also very true when it it said that “A jihadist wearing a suit is still a jihadist.”
࿗Infidel࿘ says
I disagree w/ Anni Cyrus above. The father – Hafez al Assad – was a monster, as was his older son Basil (much like Saddam and Uday next door in Iraq). However, Bashar al Assad was not a monster: he hardly had any control over his country the way his father had. When his father was the dictator of Syria, he had no qualms about massacring sunni jihadists in Homs and other places. He also arranged for the assassination of the Lebanese president-elect Bashir Gemayel in 1982 to sabotage any chances of an Israel-Lebanon peace agreement, and forcibly occupied Lebanon for years, until the Saudis got him to let go
By contrast, when Bashar al Assad came to power, the relationship b/w Syria and Hizbullah was reversed. Under Hafez, it was Damascus calling the shots, and Hizbullah, while obeying Iran, also obeyed Syria. But under Bashar, the roles reversed: Hizbullah now became a prop for the Baath regime, and in fact, the regime in Teheran as well. That’s why when they were decimated last year, the Baath regime crumbled weeks later
I also don’t agree w/ Anni that this was a Color Revolution, like Tunisia or Ukraine. It was a takeover not unlike the Taliban in 1997, when a Moscow backed regime just collapsed. It wasn’t a Jake Sullivan or an Anthony Blinken or a Susan Rice or a Victoria Nuland pulling the strings. It’s just that Russia was too distracted w/ Ukraine to the point that they were pulling military support from Syria, and Iran itself was mauled by Israel to provide any assistance. Sometimes, the explanation of events is pretty straightforward, and doesn’t require conspiracy theories
somehistory says
I agree with you, Infidel. Guess that makes us both “monsters.”
It was all over the news I saw, heard, read that he had protected Christians from slaughter at the hands of muzzies. When he was trying to stay in power, Christians were slaughtered and few commented on what was bound to happen if he lost power and fled or was killed.
It was a lot like Iraq under Saddam.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Yeah, somehistory. In the past, Hugh used to explain this in his columns about the Ba’ath party in both Iraq and Syria. The explanation ran that the Ba’ath party united the minority sect of the muzzies – sunnis in Iraq and alawites in Syria – w/ non-muslim or non-Arab groups, like Christians, Druze, and others (Kurds were somehow an exception in these). It also cleared up a question I previously had on why Saddam and Hafez Assad were enemies, despite both being Soviet stooges and both being Ba’athists. It was simply that one was sunni and the other alawite. Anyway, that’s why Christians were well off in both Saddam’s Iraq and Assad’s Syria
One thing I forgot to add above – it’s not just the Syrian jihadist who’s suited: it’s Erdogan as well. Years ago, on jihadwatch, I recall some poster observing that Erdogan is just Khamenei in a suit. Aside from their sectarian differences, he was spot on
somehistory says
muzzies who are devoted to their false god and fake prophet are *psychopaths.* Dr. Glazov wrote a book about that fact.
Years ago, Dr. Robert Hare wrote books based on his experiences dealing with criminals. One book described in much detail, the traits of a psychopath, and explained how one might be in a family and put their family members in all kinds of difficult situations.
Another, by the title “Snakes in Suits,” deals with psychopaths who are *professionals*….doctors, lawyers, scientists, professors, politicians, school coaches, etc. They wear suits, but that doesn’t change their personality to one of nice acceptability. They still con, manipulate and take advantage.
Devout muzzies who wear suits are still devout muzzies. They may not be *professionals* …though many are… but they remain psychopaths.
gravenimage says
Glazov Gang: Jihadis in Suits
…………………………………….
Mahmood Abbas, Al Sharaa–yes, just Jihadis in suits.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Erdogan as well