@soryang I guess youtube doesn't want anyone to see this video. It revealed the massive disapproval of the South Korean people have for both Yoon and the right wing Japanese administration. Can't have that.

I have to admit this was the best short video on the demonstrations Saturday.

I read Gary Sick's book on this a long time ago. He said it was Casey and implicated George HW Bush. He claims a quid pro quo in the arrangement with Iran not to release the hostages until Reagan was inaugurated was the beginning of the Iran-Contra deal. I was very suspicious of the timing of the release when it happened.

The Iraqi invasion of Iran on Sept. 22, 1980, added both urgency and confusion to the various negotiating tracks. Two former Reagan campaign aides told me that this generated new fears within the Reagan-Bush campaign that war pressures would lead Iran to release the hostages before Election Day, thereby improving President Carter's chances.

Adding to the complexity, the Carter Administration secretly had been developing plans for a possible second hostage rescue mission, after the failure of its earlier mission, Desert 1, in April. It became operational in September 1980. Richard V. Allen, Ronald Reagan's first national security adviser and a member of his campaign, told me that one member of the rescue team contacted him and gave him a description of the second rescue plan. Shortly thereafter, the Reagan-Bush campaign launched a major publicity effort warning that President Carter might be planning an `October surprise' to obtain the release of the hostages prior to the election.

From Oct. 15 to Oct. 20, events came to a head in a series of meetings in several hotels in Paris, involving members of the Reagan-Bush campaign and high-level Iranian and Israeli representatives. Accounts of these meetings and the exact number of participants vary considerably among the more than 15 sources who claim direct or indirect knowledge of some aspect of them. There is, however, widespread agreement on three points: William Casey was a key participant: the Iranian representatives agreed that the hostages would not be released prior to the Presidential election on Nov. 4; in return, Israel would serve as a conduit for arms and spare parts to Iran.

At least five of the sources who say they were in Paris in connection with these meetings insist that George Bush was present for at least one meeting. Three of the sources say that they saw him there. In the absence of further information, I have not made up my mind about this allegation.

Immediately after the Paris meetings, things began to happen. On Oct. 21, Iran publicly shifted its position in the negotiations with the Carter Administration, disclaiming any further interest in receiving military equipment. From my position at the N.S.C., I learned that Cyrus Hashemi and another Iranian arms dealer secretly had reported to State Department officials that Iran had decided to hold the hostages until after the elections.

https://irp.fas.org/congress/1992_cr/h920205-october-clips.htm

There are quite a few mostly MSM articles at the link on the October Surprise.

Scene outside Japanese Embassy in Seoul Saturday

@kelly Read his book "Trick or Treason: The October Surprise Mystery" back in the 90s. It's been 25 yrs, so memory, but I recall Parry noted how the story was confirmed by the ex-head of French intel, Russian intel, and a member of Israel's intel service. The Russian and French confirmations were sent towards the end of the House committee's investigation into the scandal, and the head of that committee, an establishment-protecting member Lee Hamilton (D-OH) said the info couldn't be confirmed/it arrived too late to confirm, so, conveniently, it was a non-factor in his whitewashing report which Hamilton seemed determined to wrap up quickly in late 1992 with a no-solid evidence conclusion.

as if the facts uncovered in an abandoned women's restroom never happened.

@wokkamile @wokkamile
Another honest man who seems to have worked more for the benefit of others than for himself. If he were to jump in the race I’d be in a bit of a quandary as to whether I would vote for him. Not because of any reservation I might have about the man, but because I would fear he would follow the well worn fate of both his uncle and his father if he were to win, and perhaps even just for running.

DC insiders would be apoplectic at the possibility of an actual populist do-gooder in the Oval Office, and are capable of just about anything. It could spoil their whole plan to rule the world and control every aspect of their subjects existence.

less as too honest than as too naive and inexperienced in the ways of Beltway politics. He brought too many of his Georgia Mafia with him to Washington, and they didn't know how things worked up north, and how rough it could get.

They didn't even know how to properly, respectfully deal with the Speaker of the House, a Dem whose help would be vital in shepherding legislation thru Congress, and with the leading senate Dem, Ted Kennedy, who apparently felt betrayed by Carter on private assurances about backing his bold health care legislation.

Honest guy, yes, but he may have put too much faith in his honesty carrying the day with the public which by '78-79 was being bombarded daily with stories of the peanut farmer's ineffectiveness and incompetence.