Trouble—Right Here in River City!

A Petty Deep Dive and a Banderite Retrospective

The other day I received an email forwarded to me by Walter A. Zaryckyj, also known as WAZ, the executive director of the Center for US-Ukrainian Relations (CUSUR) and allegedly the present-day leader in the United States of the late Ukrainian fascist Stepan Bandera (1909-59)’s underground, transnational Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B). He put his message to me in the subject line: “Kid ….. What the hell did you get yourself into? From Music Man: ‘trouble --- right here in River City’!!”

The forwarded email, evidently written for the most part by Zaryckyj but made to look like someone else had done so, referred to me in passing as “mystery man ‘Moss Robeson,’” suggesting that I am some sort of Russian agent and my name is possibly an alias. Zaryckyj has previously called me “the FSB - GRU’s new testing ground for conspiracy theories.” This time, perhaps attempting to prove that conviction, he sought to tie me to @PBaranenko (“Petro Baranenko”), a Twitter account I have never interacted with that a Senate intelligence report claimed last month belongs to a Russian intelligence officer associated for years with Paul Manafort.

Putting aside Zaryckyj’s frivolous attempts to tie anyone to @PBaranenko, and assuming “Petro Baranenko” really is the alleged Russian intelligence officer Konstantin Kilimnik, the problem remains that the Senate intelligence report’s claims about Kilimnik—“the single most direct tie between senior Trump Campaign officials and the Russian intelligence services”—are dubious, according to journalist Aaron Mate. As he wrote in a recently published two-part article, “That Senate ‘Collusion’ Report? It’s Got No Smoking Gun … but It Does Have a Fog Machine,”

the plain text of the Senate report contains no concrete evidence to support its conclusions. Instead, with a heavy dose of caveats and innuendo, reminiscent of much of the torrent of investigative verbiage in the Russiagate affair, the report goes to great lengths to cast a pall of suspicion around Kilimnik, much of which is either unsupported or contradicted by publicly available information… The Senate report also tacitly concedes it has no hard proof that Kilimnik shared information from Manafort with anyone, let alone officials in the Russian government. Kilimnik, it speculates, "likely served as a channel to Manafort for Russian intelligence services," an acknowledgment that it has not uncovered definitive proof… A deep and unresolved tension in the Senate report is that even as it declares that Kilimnik was a Russian intelligence officer, it documents his extensive U.S. government ties and involvement in political efforts hostile to Russian interests.

Zaryckyj’s conspiratorial email arrived in my inbox three days after I reached out to Adrian Karatnycky, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, whose Twitter screenshots I noticed were included at the bottom of the forwarded message. Karatnycky, it just so happens, was denounced in 2011 by the principal English language Ukrainian American newspaper as the “point man in Washington” for the Party of Regions, the pro-Russian party that Paul Manafort consulted for years. Karatnycky considers himself a critic of the OUN-B. He also sent WAZ the various screenshots, including tweets of mine, which proved nothing but got him all worked up to begin with.

The email Zaryckyj forwarded me included screengrabs showing Karatnycky’s account logged in to Twitter accompanied by a short message at the bottom telling WAZ to “Enjoy” the evidence that @PBaranenko and I—“Robeson,” again in scare quotes—interacted with a couple of the same people on Twitter (when nobody knew who “Petro Baranenko” was). In the same email, Zaryckyj evidently cut and pasted his commentary to the top of Karatncyky’s message to him, which was dated August 21 and the Atlantic Council fellow admitted sending.

Coincidentally, I reached out to Karatnycky a couple weeks after he emailed Zaryckyj, unaware that they had recently been in touch and that both apparently considered it a possibility that my name could be an alias, à la “Petro Baranenko.” After escorting me out of a CUSUR conference that I tried (politely) attending earlier this year, Zaryckyj asked somebody standing nearby to take a photo of us before he hurried back into the room. I didn’t think that I’d ever see the picture, but it turned out to be a keeper, and soon made its way Down Under. That is to say, it made an appearance on the “Ukrainian Australian Fake News Network,” a one of a kind Facebook page with roughly 500 followers, which was just permanently banned after celebrating the two year anniversary of its creation.

CUSUR Washington bureau chief Mykola Hryckowian, myself, and Walter Zaryckyj, March 2020, after escorting me out of a CUSUR conference. "Fraternising(?) with the 'enemy'. Or maybe he's already some sort of 'underground OUN member'?" the Ukrainian Australian Fake News Network commented when it posted this photo two months later.

The “UAFNN” was unofficially affiliated with the OUN-B and the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations (AFUO). Earlier this year I became convinced that it was operated in large part by an anti-Semitic Ukrainian nationalist troll from Adelaide, South Australia named Simon Bojko. Among other things I discovered that his email address was behind a Twitter account, @oz_uke, that last year in a span of 24 hours told Eduard Dolinsky, the director of the Ukrainian Jewish Committee, “Die and burn in hell you filthy жид [Yid],” and said to me, “One day soon hopefully we can piss on your grave you filthy dog.” After I made a Twitter thread about this and why I suspected Bojko to be behind the UAFNN, the latter posted the weeks-old photo of me with the CUSUR’s Mykola Hryckowian and Walter Zaryckyj, which was to my knowledge the first time it appeared on the internet. “Fraternising(?) with the 'enemy'. Or maybe he's already some sort of 'underground OUN member'?” the self-described “Fake News Network” asked mockingly.

Zaryckyj does not have a Twitter or Facebook account, hence the need for screenshots from Karatnycky. Readers of the Bandera Lobby Blog will likely recall that Stefan Romaniw, the international leader of the OUN-B, is Australian, which is undoubtedly part of the story how the UAFNN wound up posting that photo. Romaniw is also the long-time chairman of the AFUO, and was a frequent commenter on the UAFNN Facebook page. Last I checked, he still followed @oz_uke on Twitter and remains Facebook friends with Simon Bojko—but I’m oh-so-suspicious because of my non-connection with @PBaranenko?

One day the UAFNN inadvertently identified Jaroslav Duma, another executive member of the AFUO and the Honorary Consul of Ukraine in Sydney, as the OUN-B leader in Australia—essentially, Romaniw’s deputy. The Duma family has loomed large in the OUN-B affiliated Ukrainian Youth Association, both in Australia and on the international level. In a now deleted Facebook comment that I saved before the UAFNN page was banned, Duma admitted that his father was a member of the Ukrainian Waffen-SS and the OUN-B’s Ukrainian Insurgent Army, and that he had changed his last name from Boiko, also spelled in English as Bojko and Boyko. Is Duma related to the “mastermind” behind the “Fake News Network,” which is currently hoping to make a comeback as the “Factual News Network”? That would be the simplest explanation, but the truth might very well be more complicated, as in the case of the zany email I received from Walter Zarykcyj the other day.

Adrian Karatnycky declined to confirm the obvious: that Zaryckyj forwarded it to me after hearing from Karatnycky that I reached out to him asking about the OUN-B. According to Karatnycky, he hasn’t communicated with Zaryckyj about me; he just took numerous pointless screenshots for him. If, hypothetically, Karatnycky were telling the truth, it’s curious why the alleged U.S. leader of the OUN-B would ask a senior person at the Atlantic Council, of all people, for the favor. But then again, I was not the principal focus of the email. That was Ukrainian Canadian political scientist Ivan Katchanovski, whom @PBaranenko and I are both fans of, and Adrian Karatnycky is obsessed with because of his work demonstrating that the February 2014 “Maidan massacre” in Kyiv was a false flag orchestrated by the Ukrainian far-right. So I wasn’t the Atlantic Councillor’s target—in retrospect I suspect I was WAZ bait, in a botched anti-Katchanovski smear campaign that Karatnycky outsourced to Walter Zaryckyj, of all people, who was obviously interested in the “Moss Robeson” angle.

In addition to being the executive director of the CUSUR and the president of the Ukrainian American Freedom Foundation, another alleged OUN-B front organization, Zaryckyj is the chairman of the Ukrainian World Congress’ International Scholarly Council, which is tasked with coordinating “Ukrainian scholarly and higher educational institutions throughout the diaspora.” Zaryckyj fowarded Karatnycky’s email containing the Twitter screenshots of @PBaranenko’s profile and “Moss-Katchanovski” interactions to an unknown number of people, not without adding a helping of Dr. WAZ’s famous homemade batshit.

Ivan Katchanovski, he declared to all who would listen, “has been 'snagged on tape' (errrr....'on twitter') communicating with RU intel asset & Manafort's best bud Kostyantin Kilimnik … exchanging notes on another DEZINFORM 'conspiracy theory' in circulation.” There is in fact no record of Ivan Katchanovski interacting in any meaningful way with @PBaranenko. According to Katchanovski, this latest smear campaign was a “new low to denounce me for retweets [by ‘Petro Baranenko’] of my tweets concerning the Maidan massacre studies…”

“This reminds me of numerous Stalinist era denunciations of Ukrainian intellectuals as foreign agents because of their routine or invented contacts with foreigners, like travels, meetings, correspondence, etc.” Katchanovski said in a Twitter DM. “One of the victims of such denunciations was my distant relative, whose mathematical publications were used by the American inventor of the electronic digital computer. Now they [Ukrainian nationalists] use this invention to do the same.”


Adrian Karatnycky has spoken at numerous CUSUR events, including as recently as twice last year, and he even sat on the steering committees of the Center’s first seven annual “Ukraine’s Quest for Mature Nation Statehood” conferences. When I asked him about the role of the OUN-B behind the CUSUR, Karatnycky feigned ignorance. I pointed out that all of the leading members of that inaugural steering committee he was a part of in 2000 were known to be Banderites. “I am surprised,” he alleged, not so convincingly. Karatnycky and his wife both worked for major U.S. government-funded NGOs that have sponsored CUSUR events. I mentioned in my last blog post that she introduced Mykhailo Ratushny at the 2000 CUSUR conference. Karatnycky was the president and executive director of Freedom House from 1993 to 2005, and Nadia Diuk joined the National Endowment for Democracy in 1987. She passed away last year, at which point she was a vice president of the NED.

The inaugural CUSUR steering committee’s chairman, Bohdan Fedorak, had succeeded OUN-B leader Yaroslav Stetsko upon his death in 1986 as the honorary spokesperson-in-exile of a short-lived pro-Nazi government declared by the OUN-B in German-occupied western Ukraine during World War II. In 2001, Fedorak reprised the CUSUR chairman role for the second annual “Ukraine’s Quest for Mature Nation Statehood” conference, and that year the new OUN-B leader Andriy Haidamakha proudly described the CUSUR’s events as the work of “Bandera nationalists and the patriotic sections of the Ukrainian [American] community.”

At the same time that I texted Karatnycky, I emailed Alexander Motyl, a professor at Rutgers University and another self-described “long-time critic of the OUN-B.” He wrote in 1993, the year the OUN-B’s paramilitary branch in post-Soviet Ukraine was founded, that what remains of Stepan Bandera’s Organization has “what can generously be termed an ambiguous relationship with democracy.” Something Karatnycky and Motyl have in common is that as college students they worked part-time for the Prolog Research Corporation, a CIA front associated with a group of ex-Banderites led by Bandera’s wartime deputy turned postwar rival Mykola Lebed (1909-1998). Karatnycky and Motyl knew Lebed, and have periodically associated with the CUSUR, which Walter Zaryckyj has been at the helm of since its establishment by a Banderite-led consortium of Ukrainian organizations in 2000.

In the 21st century, Alexander Motyl has proven himself to be something of an absurd apologist for Ukrainian nationalists. “The right-wing Svoboda party leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has sounded remarkably like Malcolm X,” he wrote for the Huffington Post in 2015. “The hyper-nationalist Azov Battalion resembles the Black Panthers, and its leader Andrii Biletsky could easily pass for Eldridge Cleaver.” Biletsky has said that Ukraine’s destiny is to “lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade … against the Semite-led Untermenschen,” and Tyahnybok has declared, “Ukraine must be only for Banderites!” Both are often described as neo-Nazis.

In 2014, several years before she incited an intense smear campaign against U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar over alleged anti-Semitism, Batya Ungar-Sargon stated that Bandera and his wartime followers weren’t “fundamentally anti-Semitic” in an article she wrote called, “Why Are Jews Afraid of Stepan Bandera?” In it Ungar-Sargon turned to Alexander Motyl to back up her soft-pedaling of Ukrainian Nazi collaborators. Motyl, she wrote, argued that “the OUN should be understood as a typical national liberation movement along the lines of the PLO, the IRA—or even the Stern Gang,” and as for Stepan Bandera, well, according to Motyl, he was “the Ukrainian version of Ahmed Ben Bella, Yasser Arafat, Menachem Begin, Avraham Stern, and Billy McKee.”

When I asked Motyl about the OUN-B, he quickly responded, “I used to study the OUN some 40-50 years ago and am currently out of touch. You'd be better served speaking to someone like Dr. Walter Zaryckyj … who's much more in tune with current developments.” Obviously he must not have realized I am already familiar with Dr. WAZ, so I told him that and asked him some more questions. But Motyl declined to clarify if he considers himself a critic of the *21st century* OUN-B, and if he has heard that Zaryckyj is the U.S. leader of the OUN-B, and if so, why he would direct me to get in touch with Zaryckyj instead of a self-described “long-time critic of the OUN-B” such as himself. Motyl said he was too busy to email me any further.


It just so happens that Alexander Motyl will be participating in an upcoming “special event” (i.e. Zoom webinar) this Friday, September 26, organized by the CUSUR: “The Ukrainian Experience in 1945 — A 75th Year Retrospective.” It will be far from his first appearance at a CUSUR conference. Motyl is scheduled to chair the first panel discussion, featuring three speakers, all of whom it seems fair to describe as Banderites. Olesya Isayuk will be speaking on behalf of the OUN-B’s “Center for the Study of the Liberation Movement” alongside Lubomyr Luciuk, known to some as “Dr. No.” Luciuk is a professor at the Royal Military College of Canada that Karyn Ball and Per Anders Rudling flagged years ago for his “continuous championship” of the legacy of the OUN-B, its Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), and the Ukrainian Waffen-SS “in cooperation with various OUN-B institutions.”

Also joining the first panel discussion will be Laryssa Kyj, the president of the United Ukrainian American Relief Committee (UUARC), which journalist Oleksiy Kuzmenko discovered last summer has apparently provided financial support to a Ukrainian “Veterans Academy” founded and led by a notorious white supremacist accused of murdering a journalist. Kyj’s brother, Askold Lozynskyj, might just be the most powerful U.S. member of the OUN-B. Their father Evhen Lozynskyj was also a leading member of the OUN-B. As I’ve mentioned before, Askold grew up periodically getting into interethnic gang fights in Manhattan; as he once recalled: “It could be Ukrainians against Poles or Ukrainians against Puerto Ricans or Puerto Ricans against Poles. Sort of ridiculous, but when you're 12 or 11 or 10 years old, it makes sense.”

In the 1970s, the Lozynskyj siblings were members of the OUN-B affiliated Ukrainian Student Association of Mykola Mikhnovsky (TUSM)—Askold was the president—and part of the Ukrainian delegation at the first ever World Youth Anti-Communist League (WYACL) conference hosted by Washington. Four years later, in 1978, Askold Lozynskyj and Ignatius Bilinsky, two future Banderite presidents of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), attended the second World Anti-Communist League (WACL) conference to be held in the U.S. capital.

As told by Scott and Jon Lee Anderson, authors of the longly titled 1986 book, Inside the League: the Shocking Exposé of how Terrorists, Nazis, and Latin American Death Squads Infiltrated the World Anti-Communist League, the man behind the 1978 conference, Roger Pearson, a British anthropologist elected the next WACL president, was “one of the most persistent neo-Nazis in the world … [and] was responsible for flooding the European League chapters with Nazi sympathizers and former officers of the Nazi SS.” Naturally, the OUN-B wasn’t going to make a fuss about that, but the Banderites got along better with Pearson’s somewhat more respectable successor, John Singlaub, who got himself and the WACL tied up in the Iran-Contra scandal.

The CUSUR’s Mykola Hyrckowian and Walter Zaryckyj were also members of the TUSM. So was Borys Potapenko, a coordinator of CUSUR’s first conference—a former member of TUSM’s international leadership who is today the president of the international coordinating body of OUN-B affiliated NGOs, which has had many names, including the “World Conference of Ukrainian Statehood Organizations.” The now defunct TUSM was a member of the international Banderite coalition back when it was called the “World Ukrainian Liberation Front.” Former TUSM president Askold Lozynskyj was the president of the mysterious coordinating body (2008-2013) after his presidencies of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (1992-2000) and the Ukrainian World Congress (1998-2008).

Laryssa Kyj’s UUARC is a member of the National Council of the UCCA, which the OUN-B took over in 1980. Askold Lozynskyj participated in the “coup.” Almost forty years later, a lifelong member of the UCCA filed a whistleblower complaint about the Congress Committee with the Charities Bureau of the Attorney General of New York State. They did so shortly before passing away in the summer of 2019, which apparently inspired another complainant to write the NY AG’s office last year about the OUN-B. “I realize now that the UCCA keep[s] repeating many conflict of interest situations especially within the board of directors,” the first whistleblower wrote. “Having family members and/or relatives on the board of directors” was the first example given of such a conflict of interest situation.

Askold Lozynskyj, according to the UCCA complaint, remained its legal counselor as of last year. His wife Ronya Lozynskyj is a member of the UCCA board of directors and has the title of External Affairs Chair. Laryssa Kyj is also on the board as a member at large, representing the UUARC. According to the OUN-B complaint, what remains of Stepan Bandera’s network is “running…clandestinely” the New York branch of the international Ukrainian Youth Association. “Everything is supervised and approved by Askold Lozynskyj and Bohdan Harhaj,” the anonymous complainant alleged. The latter also claimed that Harhaj is the former U.S. leader of the OUN-B, and that he, as well as Zaryckyj, “assured me that they will rid the UAFF [Ukrainian American Freedom Foundation] of those individuals who interfered with OUN-B. Walter Zaryckyj on September 1, 2019 stated that his team was joined by Askold Lozynskyj, Esq, as the legal advisor, working in conjunction with … [other OUN-B members, including Hryckowian and Potapenko] … to ruin the reputations of those individuals” who stood in their way.

The first CUSUR panel session will be followed by a “focus session” dedicated to the 75th anniversary of the Ukrainian Quarterly, a journal published by the UCCA. The featured speaker will be Ihor Dlaboha, the editor in chief of the Ukrainian Quarterly since October 2019, who used to be in charge of the OUN-B’s now defunct National Tribune. Full disclosure: he once hurt my feelings when he called me a “Russian butt-kisser, low life … Moscow troll.” Dlaboha incidentally reported on the 1974 WYACL conference for the Ukrainian Weekly, published by the Ukrainian National Association in Jersey City—the newspaper that denounced Adrian Karatnycky in 2011.

Shortly before his appointment at the Ukrainian Quarterly, Dlaboha participated in an OUN-B backed scheme, allegedly masterminded by Askold Lozynskyj, to stage a coup attempt in the New York-based Organization for the Defense of Four Freedoms of Ukraine (ODFFU) by holding a surprise “extraordinary convention” in Bloomingdale, Illinois. The second complaint to the NY Attorney General’s office was submitted that day. The “extraordinary convention” appears to have backfired, and there’s no evidence that more than a small handful of people attended last year’s Banderite conclave. They named a new alleged “board of directors” chaired by Mykola Hryckowian, the head of CUSUR’s bureau in Washington, with Zaryckyj as one of his deputies, Dlaboha as his executive secretary, and Potapenko his “external affairs officer.” This group has clearly failed to win over the rank and file of the ODFFU, which went ahead with its own unordinary convention earlier this year, held via Zoom due to Coronavirus.

After Dlaboha’s noontime speech this Friday, the second panel discussion will begin as part of the CUSUR’s retrospective (not introspective) “Ukrainian Historical Encounters” webinar dedicated to the fact that 2020-1945 = 75. The panel will be chaired by Lubomyr Hajda, associate director of the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute. Among the expected participants is Ivan Patrilyak, dean of the history department at the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, who like myself seems singularly focused on the OUN-B. Except unlike Patrilyak, I’ve never been published by the OUN-B’s Center for the Research of the Liberation Movement (TsDVR). After the 2013-14 “Revolution of Dignity,” the TsDVR more or less took over the Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance (UINR). Lesya Bondaruk will ostensibly be representing the UINR in the second panel discussion. She was previously a member of the paramilitary organization Tryzub when it was still affiliated with the OUN-B, before it broke off and years later spearheaded the creation of the infamous Right Sector.

Dmytro Yarosh, future first Right Sector leader, tagged in a Facebook photo of what appears to be a press conference organized by Tryzub in the 1990s or early 2000s. Lesya Bondaruk is sitting to the left of Yarosh. 
Slava Stetsko, leader of the OUN-B (1991-2000), in Ukraine with members of Tryzub, probably in the 1990s. Stetsko is wearing purple and has her arm around Lesya Bondaruk. Mykhailo Ratushny, the subject of my last blog post, is standing to the right in a suit and red tie.

Also participating in the second CUSUR panel discussion on Friday will be Hennadi Ivanuschenko, a co-founder of the TsDVR who is the resident historian at the London headquarters of the OUN-B’s Ukrainian Information Service, which shares an address with a decades-old, cultish Stepan Bandera museum. Formerly known as the Ukrainian Central Information Service (UCIS) during the Cold War, it had an outpost in New York City, and the U.S. branch of the UCIS was instrumental in the formation of the CUSUR, according to the latter’s website. Walter Zaryckyj was the director of “UCIS/USA,” which “ultimately merged its human and material resources into the CUSUR endeavor, [and] proved to be an invaluable ‘bridge’ between the work that the steering committees of each of the Roundtables accomplished and the broader, more formalized administrative functions that the Center has now been asked to perform.”

The third “panel session,” at this point in time, has just one speaker: Taras Hunczak, another Prolog veteran who is a professor emeritus at Rutgers. Hunczak, an 88-year old former member of the OUN, was more deeply involved in Mykola Lebed’s CIA front than Karatnycky and Motyl. When OUN-B leader Yaroslav Stetsko died in 1986, Hunczak asked, “how can any responsible man accuse Mr. Stetzko [sic] of collaboration with Nazi Germany?” For starters, when he declared a short-lived Ukrainian Nationalist government as its alleged Prime Minister on June 30, 1941, Stetsko said, “The newly formed Ukrainian state will work closely with the National-Socialist Greater Germany, under the leadership of its leader Adolf Hitler which is forming a new order in Europe and the world and is helping the Ukrainian People to free itself from Muscovite occupation.”

In 2000, Hunczak wrote On the Horns of a Dilemma: The Story of the Ukrainian Division Halychyna, a book that whitewashes the Ukrainian Waffen-SS. In it he briefly touched upon the Huta Pieniacka massacre, named for a Polish village attacked in early 1944 by Ukrainian police regiments folded into the Waffen-SS later that year. As told by Hunczak, Huta Pieniacka “spread fear and terror through the neighboring Ukrainian villages,” but he makes no mention of the massacring of its hundreds of Polish inhabitants except to say that “the Ukrainian unit conquered the village … [and later] came a German unit which ‘completely pacified’ Huta Pieniacka.” On Friday, Hunczak will be speaking on “Ukrainians in Allied Displaced Persons Camps” after World War II. I’m guessing he will not be talking much about the fear and terror the OUN-B spread in the DP camps.

As things are currently scheduled, Paul Grod will have the final word at CUSUR’s upcoming webinar-conference. He is probably the highest profile person in the organized Ukrainian diaspora thanks to his stewardship of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress during the Ukraine Crisis—the start of a New Cold War with Russia, according to the late Stephen F. Cohen. Grod is now the president of the Ukrainian World Congress, with his first vice president being Stefan Romaniw. If Romaniw’s successor as the head of the OUN-B is fated to be another Ukrainian diaspora leader, then it might be Grod, who was likewise brought up in the OUN-B affiliated Ukrainian Youth Association. Grod is also the president and CEO of a Canadian energy company, so I am tempted to make a joke about him being the perfect “Ukrainian bourgeois nationalist” for the job. Grod is a committed Banderite and something of a political celebrity in Ottawa, the opinions of which are no less important than Washington to the OUN-B.

To recap, excluding the panel moderators and the “words of welcome,” most of the speakers at CUSUR’s upcoming event can be fairly described as Banderites. I have tried to register for the webinar, but will probably not be allowed to join, lest Andrij Dobriansky—the UCCA communications director, CUSUR technical coordinator, and all-around designated Banderite Zoom administrator—has to ban me for spamming the group chat with lines from The Music Man, the musical that WAZ recently introduced me to: “Trouble, oh we got Trouble, right here in River City! With a capital T and that rhymes with P and that stands for Pool!”

The Music Man first appeared on Broadway in 1957, two years before the KGB assassinated Stepan Bandera, and not long after the CIA’s Munich Operations Base collected a “list of his anti-American acts.”

  1. The organization headed by Stefan BANDERA [OUN-B] is organized on principles directly contradictory to American beliefs; these include dictatorial type of directorship, required submission to and veneration of the directorship, blind fulfillment of orders, intolerance, at al.

  2. Totalitarian tendencies expressed by the BANDERA organization are reflected in: Intolerance to any and all other thoughts, ideas, groups or organizations which are found in the emigration… Attempts to control every facet of emigre life… through use of calumny, slander, hate campaigns and even via threats and outright acts of terror… As the advocate of a totalitarian, dictatorial type of government in a future liberated Ukraine…

  3. It in its day to day activities, the BANDERA organization heeds neither civil nor moral laws…

  4. Indicated herewith are some of the anti-American activities of the SB [Security Service] arm of the BANDERA organization: ……

  5. Activities of the BANDERA organization abroad which are contrary to American laws and American principles: The organization of an underground BANDERA organization in the USA which blindly executes all orders of the BANDERA organization… The recruitment of American citizens into this illegal underground BANDERA organization and forcing them to perform activities hostile to American interests…

In sum: “We’ve surely got trouble—right here in River City!”


UPDATE #1: Here’s a 5.5 hour video of the CUSUR retrospective—the gang’s all here!


UPDATE #2: This past weekend I decided to finally block the rebranded “Factual News Network” on Twitter, because I do not feel that it is worth my attention anymore. Low and behold, who accidentally gave me a Twitter notification in short order but Simon Bojko, using an account in his name created at the same time as the “UAFNN” (~2 months ago) that has never tweeted, liked any tweets, or bothered to follow anyone. From what I recall, they were both created a few weeks after @oz_uke’s last tweet, which upon trying to confirm just now I see has been deleted in the past several days.

I believe in coincidences but Simon Bojko’s Twitter is obviously an alt account to circumnavigate the blocks the “Factual News Network” inevitably receives from trolling others. After seeing the notification from Simon, I took a last look at the week-old “Factual News Network” on Facebook, consisting of three pages, one of which is dedicated to fighting “fake news.” At the time of writing (9/28/20), it has just 11 followers. I was able to quickly identify four of them: international OUN-B leader Stefan Romaniw, Australian OUN-B leader Jaroslav Duma, and two members of the national executive of the Australian branch of the OUN-B affiliated Ukrainian Youth Association: Stephen Duma and Markian Stefanyshyn. The international OUN-B leader, in fact, is the only person to share any posts from the “fake news” page of the “Factual News Network” to date.


UPDATE #3: