Not P.....but Seymour Hersh admitting his self-blocked blindness....

[Mark Kohut]

Since I was invoked ---"you two"---as believing what are lies, I just want
to state
that I have tried to resist lies all my life....I tackle 'lies' and
mistaken beliefs in discussion groups
and debates full of people who believe in reality and facts and
truth.....---I have read two major books on lying; Pynchon's fave Orwell
on, a guy who could see clearly during the international period
most like our current one, many say.....My pragmatism studies--Wittgenstein
alone is enough--to show how to tackle "justified true beliefs" or their
opposite....

I have read the Mueller Report, the first half full of Russia's
interference in the US election of 2016---facts believed by all of the
major democratic countries of the world---the "Five Eyes" with which we
used to share and get proven intel----now, not all do share with us, with a
President who, like a few, thinks that belief in Russian interference in
the 2016 election is a Hoax....(the US stoppered our weak spots for the
2020 election)

And following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 I believe that that
observable phenomenon was a crime by international law and I am with all
the Top 30 countries in the world who
are pledging whatever help is needed for Ukraine to win their war; a war to
preserve sovereignty and democracy---and the 100 + countries who agree
about Russia's acts of aggression. (the division of UN states is the
typical Democratic vs Authoritarian country split. Except for the US, which
is supporting with money and goods authorized by Congress but whose
President believes that Russian liar and murderous Commander-In-Chief.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

I believe every stated and printed remark by V. Putin, since before 2014
and since, as he rejects even Lenin on Russia's national land as to what
imperial Russia he wants "back"

As for the Seymour Hersh "revelation' that started this, I wrote her years
ago that Mr.Hersh had, sadly, drifted fully away from his laser-focused
success in finding criminality within America's
systems, from MY Lai ---which he got from a tip---and the Abu Ghraib
crimes---which, by the way, President Obama did away with in his first week
in office. He had run on doing that and did it.
That Seymour Hersh is now a famous living example of seeing thru his past
conspiracy theory insights to believe in the lies---the actual
barrel-bombing of hundreds of thousands of his own citizens
and seeing Biden say at press conference that a certain problem 'would be
taken care of" and then when the Nordstream pipeline was destroyed using
that remark to say Biden's US had it done
is a sad example of thinking like a moron in order to justify your
unfounded conspiracy beliefs........[this is what he did, folks...look it
up]

To me, after my lifetime of reading, and rereading Pynchon and multiple
best books on him and learning from all of us here in our GroupReads and
other exchanges and continuing to think it is clearer to me than
ever---this is my critical opinion, not 'fact' of course, that Pynchon's
overwhelming comedic irony from page 1--although V is still too earnest in
this regard---is to score on conspiracy thinking
in all ways.......this last novel as well as Against the Day magnificently
shows that, I think....Seymour Hersh and others we know are caricatured
everywhere---Pynchon would have called Hersh 'Seymour"  for the incredible
ambiguous irony; he is Dr. Hilarious; there is Pynchon scoring on Marxism
and even in such minor characters as Mischa and Grisha scoring all
country-blinded conspiracies against reality.....(part of the deepest
meaning of Against the Day, imo)







On Thu, Jan 1, 2026 at 5:47 PM Martin Dietze <
pynchon at the-little-red-haired-girl.org> wrote:

> Dear Joseph,
>
> > On 1. Jan 2026, at 23:01, J Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
> >
> > Dietze:
>  you may address me in a polite and respecful way. Not doing so is likely
> going to make you look bad in the eyes of others.
>
>
> > I do not have time for your delusions.
> You actually write quite a lot considereing you don’t have time for this.
>
>
> > nothing has changed.
> In that case there is no necessity for you to bring up this subject again
> as you have done (to which I took the liberty to respond).
>
>
> >  and the fact that you only show up on the p-list on this topic is
> suspicious to me.
> While this is really not your business, let me nevertheless tell you that
> I am an active reader of the list and post when there is something I can
> add value to. I haven’t posted for several years. Now I happened to respond
> to something you wrote. You now blaming me for this seems rather
> unreasonable.
>
>
> > I believe you are deluded by liars.
> I’m afraid I have quite a bit of first hand experience with Ukraine and
> its politics. I am not telling you to believe everything I write without
> proof, but if you feel that something I write is wrong you can challenge me
> on this, so that I can back up statements with sources if necessary.
> However so far I haven’t seen much more from you than inappropriate
> behaviour and very general statements like “What a crock of shit”. Again,
> this does not make you look particularly convincing.
>
>
> > We have nothing new to discuss.
> I did not bring this up; however I take the liberty to respond to anything
> I want (and where I think I can make some contribution).
>
>
> > I refuse to treat you or him with respect because I have no respect for
> what either of you believe.
> Interesting. Looks like this is something that sets us apart. I don’t
> blame you for having beliefs which I know are wrong. This does not make you
> a bad person. While of course your behaviour doesn’t really make you seem
> reasonable..
>
>
> >  It is the 2 of you who have refused   to acknowledge or respond to
> historical facts I have presented,
> Now this can be resolved easily.
> You have presented “historical facts”. Ukrainian and Russian history has
> been my field of particular interest for about 25 years. What I have
> written here about history so far can be backed by academic historical
> literature.
> If you believe I am wrong in something particular, I invite you to bring
> on the respective points, and we can check what sources say.
>
>
> To all the others: I understand that this is really offtopic. I try to
> remain calm and, should this side-thread continue, at least contribute
> something of value for those who may nevertheless be interested.
>
> A good new year to all of you (regardless whether you agree with me or
> not)!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Martin
>
>