not sure how that wasn't obvious in what I was saying but ok. The credibility issue was the reason I said it was pointless to continue. I assumed that the fact that I didn't have what you would need to consider him credible was obvious.
These are brick walls I can't go through and can't imagine what I could say to counter. Could anybody? I can't possibly prove these false without giving the guys a lie detector test or something
"his son is trying to make some cash" .
"It's not what he "made" its what he tried to "make". Because he hasn't made any money on it doesn't mean he didn't originally intend to. His credibility is probably in serious question."
"He works for the CIA and lied to everyone all his life and we are supposed to believe him now and that he's honest?"
"Howard Hunt seems like he's full of it trying to make a buck."
I think its a pretty fascinating tape from a shadowy figure who was in the thick of things then. What you listed up there were my first impressions that led to my opinion that the tape lacked credibility.
5 other issues support my current,
but not permanent, conclusions
1. He never directly says LBJ ordered the murder of JFK.
2. The "Big Event" is never defined.
3. Hunt even seems to try and justify LBJ as a suspect in the murder. If this was confession wouldn't he just say LBJ did it, i was involved, this is what i know.
4. It is very vague to be viewed as a confession
This is why i don't view my conclusions as permanent:
5. This is not the whole recording. What he says before and after it is probably very significant. For one reason, by itself, it really doesn't say LBJ murdered JFK.