conflicting conspiracy stories?

Expediency is not a philosophy. If you're looking for commonalities through philosophy, forget it. What is important is what is expedient for certain people at certain times, a corporate mindset. Sure, they have some core beliefs, but would shoot their mother if she was revolted against their reach for power. All the above could have been possible with that idea in mind.
By the way, here's the definition of expediency:
Main Entry:ex£pe£di£en£cy
Pronunciation:-d*-*n(t)-s*
Function:noun
Inflected Form:plural -cies
Date:1612

1 : the quality or state of being suited to the end in view : SUITABILITY, FITNESS
2 obsolete a : HASTE, DISPATCH b : an enterprise requiring haste or caution
3 : adherence to expedient means and methods *put more emphasis on expediency than on principle— W. H. Jones*
4 : a means of achieving a particular end : EXPEDIENT
-ex£pe£di£en£tial \-*sp*-d*-*en-ch*l\ adjective

(Thanks to Merrian-Webster Inc. 2002)

QUOTE:

If I watch "The Power of Nightmares" i'm shown that Wolfowitz, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were mad at Nixon for working to de escalate the Cold war and that the CIA was backing Nixon. So they used woodward at the Washington Post to bring Him down in watergate and got Ford in who went with the Neocons to set up the B Group which went against the CIA and created false evidence that the USSR was developing secret weapons and they jump started the cold war. We see their connection with Woodward today using him to lead info.

Here is my question:

which is it? is nixon good with the bushes? is he their enimy? are the WOLOWITZ-CHENEY-RUMSFELD-WOODWARD-W Bush neocons a SEPARATE bloc from the CIA-HW Bush-NIXON circle?

END QUOTE

1. I would diagree with the philosophical conjeture above in the previous comment. There are far more tangible issues going on here.

2. They wanted the cold war to continue because it WAS PROFITABLE ECONOMICALLY. The U.S. financiers were funding and selling American military technology both the USSR--which filtered into Vietnam from their side--as well as the American armies in Vietnam for instance. (Cite: find the free book by Antony Sutton, _Best Enemy Money Can Buy_). If their puppet Nixon or the branch in the CIA got "too independent" (i.e., domestically inclined groups seeking real national security--instead of national insecurity like these people around Bush) and found a route to actual peace 'independently' of this war profiteering scam, the whole military industrical complex of fake wars and real weapons sales would have been seriuosly curtailed, as well as likely exposed.

3. They wanted the cold war to continue because it was PROFITABLE POLITICALLY. And there's nothing like an ongoing (fake) war to justify a totalitarian police state--the only ideogical goal these covert operators around the Bushies want for 40 years ongoing. The Bush clique IS the terrorist "bin Laden family" of America.

4. If Nixon "dared" to remove #2 and #3 capacities from the equation, then well, he would be removed. And he was. They dislike independent Presidents, Republican or Democrat. Kennedy is one example of a more 'independent' Democratic run. However, if they had killed off Nixon soon after that would get a bit suspicious two back to back assassinations of Presidents almost. So they had him impeached (really, he resigned before he would be). Besides, it was Bush who Nixon appointed as head of the Republican Party who even backstabbed Nixon publicly to "step down" in the wake of the Hunt/FBI scandal--which hypocritically was tied back to Bush and Leidke money himself Bush didn't want to expose himself! That is why Bush left the U.S. in the middle of Watergate as well: His networks were KEY TO THE WHOLE STORY of Hunt, CIA assassination networks, and money laundering, and the drug trades. (cite: George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography). Bush was quickly appointed by Nixon to go to China as Nixon's personal representative so that (to use Nixon's phrase, the "whole Bay of Pigs thing"* wouldn't get aired in the Hunt investigation cover-up process as well (when the payoff of Hunt came from Bush's main main Liedke, who helped Bush fund and create Zapata Offshore). (*The quoted phrase in Nixon-speak was a codeword for the Kennedy Assassnation plot.)

5. There is additoinally the angle that they wanted to substitute their "own dependent man" once more, instead of using the Nixon recycled candidacy as a ploy. (They even had "their own man as the VP of Kennedy as a backup, Johnson, by the way--who was connected with Brown and Root, and VP Johnson (who had ALWAYS wanted to be President) helped out in the Assassination of Kennedy by covering it up, and some claim, actively perpetrating the planning). Simiar to putting "their dependent man in as a VP" once more after it worked so well with Johnson shadowing Kennedy (without Johnson as "teir man" the whole thing would have come unglued), Bush was attempting to get himself inserted as "dependent man" as Nixon's VP in 1968. This in my opinion, would have have assuredly led to a Nixon assassination sooner or later in my opinion--since we have seen this before in Kennedy, as well as just as when Bush Senior became VP for real finally in 1981 after more than a decade of attempting to do so, within mere months Bush Senior assassnates Reagan (with a CIA MKULTRA toy of theirs, the Hinkley brother) to get into power (cite: George Bush: the Unauthorized Biography; and here:

Title: WOODWARD, Pentagon plant, rep. of people 2 remove Nixon: why? "THE 25TH AMEND. TRICK"
Author: skolnick
Date: 2004.04.21 10:02
Description: THE 25TH AMENDMENT TRICK--USED IN TWO ATTEMPTS TO GET TO THE PRESIDENCY WITHOUT ANY ELECTION Queuing up to appoint President Nelson Rockefeller, via a SLOW COUP of appointments and assassinations, a technique that Bush has learned from well it seems. In 1973: plan was to remove VP Agnew first, appoint a crony, then remove Nixon next (suitably bribed), thus, having both appointed Pres & VP as appointees, after the JFK assassination; then kill off the Pres. appointeee (Ford, who had appointed Nelson as VP). However, Ford survived 3 assassination attempts--messing the queueing all up. Did the Nelson Rockefeller scheme die with him, in 1979, after he basically appointed the whole administration of Trilaterals to Jimmy Carter's administration as a consolation prize to his failes slow coup? Or did it live on in the attempt to remove Gore in 1998? and then in Gore assassination attempts in 2000? And the attempts to vacate Cheney without vacating Bush? Something to keep in mind: this would be an entirely legal coup. Watch out. Since November 22, 1963 (murder of U.S. President John F. Kennedy by a Nazi inside cabal linked to Johnson, Lemnitzer, Nixon, Bush Sr.), American politics has been overshadowed by a gangster turf war. It was not taken seriously by voters for four decades. Voters might be well advised to rethink their decision to ignore this.
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/04/286401.shtml

However, Reagan failed to die! That messed everything up a bit. Reagan even reported that someone stabbed something sharp (like a razor) into his abdomen when they were shoving him into the car to "protect him"! (cite: George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography). The doctors do note a different type of wound than a bullet wound that nearly missed severing his aorta. Two failed assassation attempts. The third might be the fact that they drove around waiting for Reagan to die of his wounds in the car for 30 minutes. Meanwhile the Brady Social Security officer who was wounded actually got to the hospital long before Reagan ever did! The fourth attempt at assassination of Reagan was the desire to "move him to Bethesda" to kill him off somehow, though the doctor at the hospital rejected moving Reagan. Foiled once more. (Forrestal, first Sec of Defense (post WWII) was murdered in Bethesda when he "got too independent" for the people that wanted dependent political actors only).

6. If they had been successful in running Ford (or Nelson Rockefeller for Republican President in 1976), then their self-hit on the WTCs might have occurred during 1976-1979--being scheduled then simply because they were all in position to cover up and move toward #3. They were only in a position to personally cover the self-hit on the WTCs with 2001. And it immediately happens. And with exactly the same 1976 crew in almost identical positions. That is the telling bit. You see their ploy is to pretend they are patriots and "interested in national security, naturally" they desire to have the government run tests of terrorism to "work out the kinks, you know, in our defenses". Actually, this is just a ruse for the criminal groups to find what the holes are, and then exploit them to the full.

Title: US DoD McNiven RICO SUIT! BUSH SENIOR, CIA head, & his 1976 state terror plan to hit WTCs!
Author: repost
Date: 2005.03.20 06:18
Description: A LIVE COURT CASE! DEAL WITH IT! WELCOME TO REALITY. Our own U.S. Army devised a plan commissioned by Congress to bring down the WTC...McNiven, who first went public in an affidavit included in a 9/11-related federal conspiracy (RICO) lawsuit filed against Bush and others in 2004, claims his unit was ordered to create the "perfect terrorist plan" using commercial airliners as weapons and the Twin Towers as their target.....publicized version of the study, commissioned by Congress, was to identify security lapses and submit corrective measures to lawmakers. However, McNiven claims the real purpose of the study was to brainstorm how to pull off the perfect terrorist attack using the exact same 9/11 scenario. The study, commissioned to C-Battery 2/81st Field Artillery, U.S. Army, stationed in Strassburg, Germany in 1976, specifically devised the scenario of the Twin Towers being leveled by Middle Eastern terrorists using commercial airliners and even plastic box cutters to bypass security. To silence critics, McNiven has successfully passed a credible lie detector test regarding his participation in the study as well as other specific orders given to him by his superiors in case of a real attack on the Twin Towers. The head of the 1976 mock terrorist plan was Lt. Michael Teague of Long Island, who McNiven says was given specific orders by higher-ups in the military to use the Twin Towers as the terrorist target. McNiven said he has been unable to contact Lt. Teague, but was interested in his opinion now that "the 9/11 attacks happened the way we planned them in 1976."
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/03/313859.shtml

This is why all the holes in security were reported by the Hart-Rundman sp? commission in 2001, were kept OPEN as NOW KNOWN HOLES TO THE BUSHIES (which were then exploited in the 9-11-01 events for their own use, simply reading the goverment classified report on the holes and building the holes into making the terror strike fit the holes well). This is exactly what happened. Even CFR Hart said "the President shut it down" (i.e., shut down all their security hole plugging recommendations in March 2001, though had them in his hands. Bush tells Hart "I'll have Cheney study it"--even thgough Cheney is just the VP, and Hart and others had been working on this for two years. Bush then appointes Cheney to head of Domestic (Hole) Preparedness in FEMA, giving Cheney access to the classified report of security holes as he stood down on 9-11 orchestrating the planes and NORAD connections. Cheney had authority to coordinate "national emergency" response and he knew the classified reports "security holes" as well. Nothing was allowed to happen.

7. QUOTE: "So they used woodward at the Washington Post to bring Him down in watergate". Well, sort of. [a] They pulled down Nixon because they were attempting to keep THEMSELVES out of the limelight of investigation because it was the same network around Hunt and the Bushies were the whole "Bay of Pigs thing." To really expose Hunt, would be to unravel it back to the start--to expose the whole bipartisan agreement roadshow shadow government that supported the criminal coup of 1963 against JFK. [b] Woodward is CIA, like his father Woodward. (cite: WOODWARD, Pentagon plant, rep. of people 2 remove Nixon: why? "THE 25TH AMEND. TRICK")

8. Remember that Bush Senior (CIA himself key to the "Bay of Pigs thing" himself) was quickly apppointed as head of the CIA in the middle of the House Committee on Assassinations which formally ruled that Kennedy was assassnated due to a huge conspiracy, and not the lie of the Warren Commission. The previous CIA director had been cooperating with the House Committee on Assassinations. That guy was fired by "dependent" Ford, and Bush was quickly inserted. It was in Bush's personal interest--used as the assurance of his participation in the ongoing cover up--that he categorically refused to have the CIA participate anymore in this real investigation as it was before.

9. According to all reports, Bush Senior, that true Cassius, the Cassius of the U.S. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Cassius_Longinus) was there to steady his moron son's hand for plunging the knife into America's soul on 9-11. I belive it has been reported that Bush Senior spent the night before 9-11 in the White House. With Bush Senior's background, I expect there was a pep talk for state terrorism that night in the White House.

10. There may have been an additional level. Some groups in the U.S. (perhaps Cheney) were willing to additionally sacrifice the symboilic though moronic President as well, since there was a failed assassination attempt on Bush the morning of 9-11, that could only have been done by knowing the Presidents wherabouts, personal names of Secret Service men (which they did), and later Presidential communication access codes). My bet is on Cheney running a bit of "indepenent terrorism" to kill off Bush Jr., to leave President Cheney after the concrete dust died down on 9-11--something that I am sure Bush Senior didn't want at all.