More unhinged slanders from the WSWS

In yet another unhinged attack on us that is featured prominently at the top of the World Socialist Web Site home page, an article titled, Oppose the Steiner-Tissot smear campaign! Defend Comrade Bogdan Syrotiuk!, claims that we launched a “provocation” that

… is a deliberate attempt to undermine the defense of Comrade Syrotiuk, the Young Guard of Bolshevik-Leninists, and the International Committee as a whole.

This adds another slander to the list that the WSWS has already issued.  To those who have not been following this saga, what the article calls a “provocation” was our initial publication of a letter that alleged that the ICFI committed a serious lapse in security in their reporting about Ukrainian political prisoner Bogdan Syrotiuk.  We learned shortly after we published the letter that the information was false and immediately took it down, issuing a retraction titled, A correction and an apology. Shortly afterwards, the WSWS published an article accusing us of deliberately forging the letter in question. Our response, A scurrilous libel from the WSWS,  demonstrated that the WSWS deliberately slandered us in at least three instances. 

1.    The website claimed that we never gave the WSWS editorial board an opportunity to comment before we published the letter.

2.    It claimed that we knew the author of the letter was a provocateur who went by the handle of “Alexander Goldman”.

3.    It further claimed that in fact we never received a letter from a source that wished to remain anonymous but that we actually fabricated the letter.

We conclusively refuted each one of these defamatory statements.  We provided evidence that anyone can check showing that:

1.    We sent two emails to David North asking for a comment prior to our publication of the letter.

2.    We presented conclusive evidence that we received a letter from Anonymous, aka “Daniel Bukvasevic” and that we did not fabricate the letter.

3.    We provided conclusive evidence that the letter we received was sent to us some two weeks before the provocateur “Alexander Goldman” started broadcasting his tweets.   This established that our source of information was not connected to “Alexander Goldman”, of whose existence we were not aware. 

We also provided evidence showing that the ostensible author of the letter, “Daniel Bukvasevic” was a long-time ICFI member or close supporter named Dan Reznik.  It was only when we discovered the identity of the letter writer - who in the meantime had ceased to communicate with us - that we felt the allegations had sufficient credibility to warrant publication.  While we were mistaken in that belief, it was not an “irrational” decision on our part since the letter actually came from a long-time collaborator of the WSWS.

A recap of the evidence:

Screenshot #1: Our emails to David North asking for a comment prior to publication

.

Screenshot #2: Letter from "Daniel Bukvasevic/Anonymous" received on Dec. 17, 2024, two weeks prior to the emergence of the provocateur "Alexander Goldman".

               

 

Screenshot #3: End of email from "Daniel Bukvasevic/Anonymous" signed "Anonymous" 

Screenshot #4: The Reddit account showing that "Bukvasevic" and "Dan Reznik" is the same person.

On the basis of the evidence we presented, we insisted that the WSWS correct the record and retract their slanderous accusations.

What was the reaction of the WSWS to our demand?

Not only has the WSWS failed to respond to our takedown of their slanders, but the site has also not even acknowledged that we did in fact respond to them.  Instead of retracting their libelous allegations or, for that matter, challenging our refutation,  WSWS has doubled down on its slanders by engaging further and more extreme slanders.

That is the significance of their latest attack on us.

Let us examine some of their statements in detail

They write:

In its initial publication, Sam Tissot claimed that they decided to “hide” the real name of the source. But why conceal the author of a fabricated letter? The only logical explanation is that the publisher knew the author well and understood his political physiognomy. If the audience were aware of the author’s identity, they could examine his past statements, exposing his broader political agenda.

This argument makes no sense.  We posted the letter and attributed it to an anonymous author because that is how he wanted to be identified.  This was the basis of what the WSWS article represents as a sinister action on our part of “hiding”  and “concealing” the identity of the author.  Is it possible that these people have never heard that it is standard journalistic practice to attribute information to an anonymous source if the person providing that information does not wish to be identified?

When we published the letter, we were unaware that the author provided us with false information. Once we became aware that the information was false, we took down the letter and published our apology.  Furthermore, when we learned several days later that the author of the letter was an anti-communist provocateur, we no longer felt obligated to maintain his anonymity and published everything we knew about him, including the fact that he was, until very recently, a member or close supporter of the ICFI named Dan Reznik.   We explained all this in our article, A scurrilous libel from the WSWS, but the WSWS makes no reference to our explanation.

The WSWS article also repeats again the slander that we “fabricated” the letter. There is no acknowledgement that we published screenshots showing beyond any doubt that we did in fact receive a letter signed “Anonymous” from which the content of what we later published was taken.

The statement continues,

In fact, this individual also contacted a comrade of the YGBL in a clear attempt to sow confusion and discord among Bogdan’s comrades. At the time, we recognized it as a transparent provocation and assumed that this person was acting in coordination with the Ukrainian secret service (SBU). This was the only rational conclusion for anyone committed to Bogdan’s defense and even remotely familiar with the politics and history of the ICFI. Yet Alex Steiner chose to publish this letter. Why?

This was NOT the only rational conclusion. Our conclusion, even if it was mistaken, was not irrational but was the product of an extended investigation on our part as we explained in our article. Although our investigation was flawed, we took full responsibility for our error and published an apology. That is also a standard journalistic practice, one, I might add, that you cannot find in the pages of the WSWS as they have never, even once, published a retraction. On the other hand, in the very same paragraph of the WSWS article, we find the admission that someone from the YGBL also received the same letter with the same allegations.  Doesn’t  that fact blow up the WSWS conspiracy theory that we “fabricated” the letter?

The statement then goes on to raise the stakes in the slander campaign against us by accusing us of attempting to sabotage the defense campaign of Bogdan Syrotiuk.

Even if the accusations against the International Committee had been true—which they were not—publishing such a letter could only serve to undermine Bogdan’s defense. He is being persecuted by the Ukrainian state and faces a potential life sentence. Such actions violate not only the most fundamental principles of defending the democratic rights of those persecuted by the state but also basic political decency.

While our publication of the letter was a mistake how would it undermine Bogdan's defense? There was nothing in that letter that the prosecution did not already know. 

The statement continues,

Goldman’s abrupt disappearance from X on February 3 made clear that he was attempting to cover his tracks as the source of the smear campaign. Fortunately, international comrades preserved screenshots of his posts, allowing them to reconstruct a profile of the author and his role in orchestrating this provocation. His posts made it evident that the primary objective was to discredit the ICFI, particularly in relation to the struggle for Comrade Bogdan’s liberation. Yet, even after the International Committee exposed this fabrication, Steiner continued to defend his reckless provocation.

This is yet another slander.  What the WSWS labels  “Steiner’s…reckless provocation”, i.e. the letter that we published, was not “defended” but was immediately taken down with an apology when we learned its contents were false. Several days later, when the WSWS published its slanderous accusations against us, we responded through a meticulous exposure of their lies backed up with solid evidence. By way of a dishonest journalistic sleight of hand, the WSWS article conflates these two actions to make the case that we “defended” our publication of the letter.

The WSWS then goes on to deliver their ultimate accusation,

Only the International Committee and the YGBL have waged this struggle, which is why they now face the full force of state repression. Through their reckless and despicable provocation, Alex Steiner and his allies have exposed their political alignment—with the enemies of the Trotskyist movement and the democratic rights of the international working class.

What is despicable is the baseless accusation that we are connected to the state repression of the Zelensky regime that has victimized Bogdan Syrotiuk. In engaging in such filth, the ICFI has crossed a line.  Its smear campaign against us, now going on two decades, graduated into outright agent-baiting recently with the publication of the book, The Party is Always Right. [1]  They have now elevated their slander campaign to another level by accusing us of being accomplices of the Ukrainian secret service.

These unhinged denunciations are being tossed around to cover over the inconvenient truth that the WSWS cannot respond to our proof that they made false and defamatory statements against us.  To repeat them once more:

1.    They lied in claiming that we never attempted to contact the WSWS prior to the publication of the letter.

2.    They lied in claiming that we “fabricated” the letter.

3.    They lied in claiming that we knew that the author of the letter was the provocateur “Alexander Goldman”.

Up till now there has been no response to our documentation of these slanders.

To this list can now be added two new slanders:

1.    The slander that we “deliberately” tried to undermine the campaign to free Bogdan Syrotiuk.

2.    The slander that the letter contained information that could help the prosecution.

Finally, we have to ask, why is the WSWS remaining silent about our exposure that the author of the letter was actually a member or close supporter of the WSWS named Dan Reznik, an individual who was associated with the WSWS for a number of years?

What does it say about the ICFI that they harbored someone within their ranks for years who turned out to be a provocateur working, in their own words, “in coordination with the SBU”? 

 

---

[1] For a summary of North’s decades-long smear campaign against us see, The devil that never dies: Calumnies in the service of historical falsification, http://forum.permanent-revolution.org/2023/11/the-devil-that-never-dies-calumnies-in.html. For our response to North’s agent-baiting, see, Agent baiting: A hysterical slander from David North, http://forum.permanent-revolution.org/2024/09/agent-baiting-hysterical-slander-from.html.

Share: