Would any leaders betray their masters out of conscience?

Hey, JFK was brave enough to do it...even though he got assassinated. Now, if we have more of those kind of people, there may be a rebellion within the NWO! Hahaha funny prospect...

[edit on 12-2-2008 by wolfwood290]

I'm inclined to say no, if for no other reason than if the NWO exists, they'd make sure that those they helped ascend to power would be people they knew with certainty were sufficiently morally bereft to never consider betrayal. It would also be difficult to disseminate enough information, fast enough, so that it could not be easily caught and stifled. If a national leader announced everything, and offered up records and documents, but then found that all the records and copies had been destroyed, it would destroy the politician's credibility, and make the populace think "Huh...NWO...what a madman he was to think of that."

Basically the point I'm trying to make is that any organisation powerful enough to consider a global take over, is also powerful enough to decide who the key political players are. And even if they ended up with a wild card, those in the know would be sufficiently intelligent to realise that exposure would be difficult, to say the least.

Originally posted by wolfwood290
Hey, JFK was brave enough to do it...

I'd love to see an example of this. IMO, JFK was a sell-out like the rest of them.

What exactly did he do to make him so heroic? Pulled the US out of Vietnam? No. Stopped the Federal Reserve Scam? No. He fired Allen Dulles, but as a scapegoat for the Bay of Pig fiasco. Is that heroic? No.

You'd be hard-pressed to find any actual heroes in this century. Before that, Lincoln and Jefferson might actually be called heroes.

Eisenhower warned us about them. (but again, did he do anything to stop it? No. He warned us in his Farewell Address, once he couldn't do anything anymore)

reply to post by ConspiracyNut23






Sadly, I think you speak the truth. Depressing times we live in.