Good question, Rick.
And I think, quite surprisingly, that the answer is yes.
Anyone who studies religion can't help asking themselves the same question repeatedly. Religious ideas aren't typically rational, and most often they are ludicruous from the point of view of a non-believers. Yet, they have millions of followers.
The leaders is of course in a different position, but ever since Russell, and in particular after Rutherford, future JW leaders have been bred not as leaders, but followers. That is why the WTS leadership is, as Penton said, "a cult of anonymity".
The JW leaders -- the GB and the even more anonymous shadow leaders -- have all come to the position they are through unfailing and blind obedience to leaders. Most all were once pioneers or missionaries, living a hard, dangerous and uncomfortable life to satisfy the Organization.
When these men eventually reach the top, they still are followers, not realizing they follow themselves like a cat chasing its tail. They simply do what they have always done in life: following organizational policy. Even when they themselves dictate the same policy, they look to something they think is bigger than themselves: the image in their minds of the ominpotent Organization.
Not that they aren't aware that much of what they do is dishonest. But again, JWs are conditioned to think the truth is whatever supports organizational policy, not what is factual. And the ends almost always justify the means in such organizations.
Only in one situation where it comes to the JWs did I seriously doubt that the leader believed what he himself said: when Rutherford instituted the "princes" doctrine to justify his luxurious palaca Beth Sarim. Yet, at the time I think he actually was so deluded by his ideas about his own grandiour that he actually believed that whatever he said, was the truth, by definition.
- Jan