Oswald in Minsk

[Charles Drago]

To be clear, there is no way for me to verify or dismiss this story. It is not a "fact."

It has been nearly ten years since I've been in touch with the person who told it to me, and I have no idea how to re-establish contact.

At the time, I posed numerous probing questions. My conclusions then: The person was a naif in terms of the JFK assassination in particular and deep politics in general; the person remembered the Webster material because of its dramatic content; the person claimed to have won Webster's trust to the degree that he broke his near-perpetual silence with the person and almost no one else; the person believed Webster's married-to-Marina story.

[Albert Doyle]

If true one would have to ask what Webster would have to gain by telling this at that point? What potential disinformation purpose would it serve? If the witness was a 'naif' it makes it less likely they would have dubious disinformation purposes themselves. The arguments for truth are much stronger than the alternative.

[Peter Lemkin]

Charles, this is not connected to that person/story. Its a whole different person who claims to have known Oswald [and still has audio tapes of the two of them] and wrote this book.

[Charles Drago]

Peter,

Are you sure?

Titovets claims to have LHO tapes.

I hope that you're not conflating my Webster contact/story with the book.

[Peter Lemkin]

Peter,

Are you sure?

Titovets claims to have LHO tapes.

I hope that you're not conflating my Webster contact/story with the book.

This book is by Titovets. Some of his tapes can be heard here.
Before, I'd heard that Marina was Webster's lover and girlfriend, never his wife...but who knows. It was a spy's world and all of them: Lee, Titovets, Marina, Webster, the Zeiglers, Priscilla Johnson McMillan, DeMohrenschildt, the Paines, Spas T. Raiken, Jack Ruby - and SO many others connected to Lee's life [or pulling his strings] were ALL spooks!

[Vasilios Vazakas]

the problem with this book is why to believe what its author has to say about events that occured 48 years ago.
we don't know his motives, if he is schooled by some intel service, if he is a disnfo agent etc.

[Peter Lemkin]

the problem with this book is why to believe what its author has to say about events that occured 48 years ago.
we don't know his motives, if he is schooled by some intel service, if he is a disnfo agent etc.

All you say is true....and I'll read the book in that light...as I have SO many others!....I do have reason to believe, however, that this person actually was an acquaintance of Oswalds....and one hopes to get a few tidbits despite the fact that both were intelligence agents playing intelligence games long ago.... the last book by a former Soviet intel agent was worthless, IMHO. I can't yet evaluate this one. I do know someone who went to Minsk to visit the Professor / Doctor and got a 'royal' Oswald tour of all the places they used to live and go to way back then. I was saddened to hear that this person didn't video the multi-day tour!....but I assume anyone else willing to make the effort to get to Minsk might also receive a similar tour and garner some information or clues from that. I hope some are in the book....as Minsk is not on my dance card for now.

So, sorry Charles, I was wrong, it is the same person.
Lastly, Vasilios, while we often get only confusion from current or 'former'-[if such exists] intel agents, we have also learned much from them - both by applying a 'negative template' and sometimes by simply examining things they didn't want disclosed or disclose themselves about them or things they mention......they even AT RARE times do give out truthful and useful information...but I admit that ain't often and it is usually hidden inside disinfo...but one can't pre-judge that without scrutiny, IMO.

[Magda Hassan]

All books should be approached with caution. If Oswald himseld wrote a book about the events (hypothetically speaking as it can only be) then he too would have to be treated with the same template.

[Peter Lemkin]

All books should be approached with caution. If Oswald himseld wrote a book about the events (hypothetically speaking as it can only be) then he too would have to be treated with the same template.

Well, in fact someone [most experts think not Oswald, or Oswald under general instructions and at one or two 'sittings'] did indeed write a diary of the 'Oswald' stay in the USSR.....and any good researcher treats it with caution as to objective, or even subjective, facts.

[Peter Lemkin]

Sorry, I forgot about this thread...discovered it looking for something else. I long ago got the book, signed by the author Professor Ernst P. Titovets, read it and have had a modest email exchange with him. The book suffers much from inadequate editing of Titovets English, which was from some old British books and has a very strange style...but forget that...I'd not be able to write a book in Russian. He writes only about what he knows first hand. Only in a small part of the last chapter does he speculate even a little [about what happened and why to his friend he knew in Minsk]. More than anything else, it gives a glimpse into the character of the man who was Oswald in the USSR as to personality, temperament and interests, etc. It also confirms that Oswald spoke little Russian - even at the end only polite phrases he could parrot. He understood a little. He was far, far from fluent! And the book makes clear that most of the time this Oswald did nothing that would be called spying and, of course, at the time Titovets and others all kept in the back of their minds he could be. I am inclined to think that Titovets was not a spy, and was, if anything, only used by his chance encounter with Oswald as someone to inform on him....but he claims there was nothing to inform upon....they went to concerts, they chased women, they had drinks, they horsed around, he helped Titovets with his English, they went to work [separately], etc. Titovets is convinced that the Oswald he knew could not have and did not kill anyone on 11/22/63. He is curious to know [and I have sent him some materials and suggested a few good books he now is reading] if that Oswald was, at the time he knew him, an intelligent agent of some kind. Certainly, what one would likely call a 'sleeper' or just to test the Soviet reaction. Perhaps [this is me speculating], his only function was one or two things - maybe something about the U2; maybe to get Marina out for the purposes of some or several intelligence agencies. While in the USSR he was closely watched - but from a distance..and I think Titovets was not actively spying on him. If any are interested to communicate with him, PM me privately and I will perhaps give you his email, after asking him with your reason to want to talk to him. He is a very nice person, from what I can gather via our exchanges....and mystified how he happened to meet this strange American who stuck out like a sore thumb and later was accused of killing the President of the USA. He really would like to know more about Oswald and the whole case. He admits he has not read many of the better and latest books. Though a research scientist of some renown in Belarus, he makes little money to afford sending to the USA for such books. Anyone with an extra copy of the better books to send him, I'm sure he'd much appreciate it! I certainly do not regret reading the book and feel I have a somewhat better picture of the Oswald who was in the USSR. By the way, Titovets found a few more errors in the book Harvey and Lee as concerns dates and things that happened in the USSR.