Iranian Pastor to be Executed: Won't Renounce Christianity

MORE AT THE BABYLON OBSERVER MESSAGE BOARD

Traversing the Moral Rubicon (From the Archives)

by Phillip D. Collins ©, June 22nd, 2006 - In the Masonic "bible," Morals and Dogma, Albert Pike writes: ". . .no human being can with certainty say. . .what is truth, or that he is surely in possession of it, so every one should feel that it is quite possible that another equally honest and sincere with himself, and yet holding the contrary opinion, may himself be in possession of the truth. . . "(160)

Evident in this statement is the overall relativistic Weltanschauung of Freemasonry. This Weltanschauung is the dominant paradigm among all correlative elitist groups as well. As adherents to relativism, the ruling class rejects absolute truths and moral certainties. Over the years, this Weltanschauung has been vigorously promulgated by the elite and, thus, has become the dominant paradigm of society. The mantra of "Do what thou wilt" is continually reiterated by academia, the media, and pop culture. With each successive generation, humanity continues its inexorable drift towards amorality. Of course, this drift serves the interests of the ruling class. The further away humanity drifts from morality, the closer it drifts towards enslavement. C.S. Lewis reiterated this contention in Christian Reflections:

The very idea of freedom presupposes some objective moral law which overarches rulers and ruled alike. Subjectivism about values is eternally incompatible with democracy. We and our rulers are of one kind only so long as we are subject to one law. But if there is no Law of Nature, the ethos of any society is the creation of its rulers, educators and conditioners; and every creator stands above and outside his own creation. (81)

Amorality facilitates the dialectic of freedom followed by Draconian control (Jones 15). With the enshrinement of moral relativism, society invariably assumes a progressively more anarchistic trajectory. Impulses are entertained and excesses are indulged. Meanwhile, objective moral law is increasingly disregarding. Eventually, individual liberties are subordinated to hedonist appetites. Fleeting pleasures are ravenously sought, even at the expense of others. The ensuing chaos provides a pretext for the imposition of authoritarian policies to restore order. Of course, there is always a self-appointed elite that establishes and benefits from such systems.

Paradoxically, the power elite is equally as amoral as those they would fetter in the name of the law. Ruling class thought is permeated with relativistic notions. It is just such relativism that allows the oligarchs to believe that they can act as the arbiters of the dominant societal ethos. It comes as little surprise that Oxford Professor Carroll Quigley, a self-avowed elitist and apologist for the ruling class, rebuked the lower classes for their rejection of "complex relativisms" (Quigley 980). Of course, Quigley's endorsement of "complex relativisms" was irreconcilable with his endorsement of an absolutist world oligarchy. After all, one cannot lay claim to an absolute right to rule if there are no absolutes at all.

In addition to promoting amorality, relativism encourages the embracing of irrationality. The problem with relativism is a systemic one, a dilemma intrinsic to the view itself. Relativism is predicated upon the contention that there are no absolutes. Yet, if there are no absolutes, then one cannot absolutely declare that there are no absolutes. In fact, declarative statements cannot exist because they are statements of fact. Facts are absolutes and, according to relativism, do not exist. Immediately, the position implodes, crushed by its own intrinsic irrationality. Relativism is a self-refuting philosophical position.

However, Darwinism cosmetically obfuscated the irrationality that blemished relativistic Weltanschauungs. By undermining the foundations of Christianity with so-called "scientific proof," Darwinism banished moral absolutes and edified the unstable premises upon which relativism tottered. In The Outlines of History, H.G. Wells writes:

If all animals and man evolved, then there were no first parents, no paradise, no fall. And if there had been no fall, then the entire historic fabric of Christianity, the story of the first sin, and the reason for the atonement collapses like a house of cards. (616)

With Christianity's "house of cards" effectively toppled, relativistic ideas could be actively promulgated with less resistance. Such ideas were certainly nothing new and had been promoted before by ideologues like Hume, Bacon, Rousseau, Descartes, Kant, and Weishaupt (Jasper 262). Yet, Darwinism was different. Cribbed from Freemasonic doctrine and promoted through the British Royal Society, Darwin's theory of evolution promised to "scientifically" legitimize relativistic Weltanschauungs. This included, of course, the relativistic outlook of the Royal Society's would-be sculptors of a new societal ethos. The nature of this emergent ethos becomes apparent [when] one considers the technocratic proclivities of the Royal Society's early Masonic founders.

In light of these observations, it becomes clear that Darwinism was an epistemological weapon developed for the technocratic restructuring of society. Jane H. Ingraham elaborates:

But Darwin's role was to dignify [relativistic] these ideas with "scientific" backing and to make them accessible to the average man in terms he could understand. His shattering "explanation" of the evolution of man from the lower animals through means excluding the supernatural delivered the coup de grace to man's idea of himself as a created being in a world of fixed truth. Confronted with the "scientific proof" of his own animal origin and nature, Western man, set free at last from God, began the long trek through scientific rationalism, environmental determinism, cultural conditioning, perfectibility of human nature, behaviorism, and secular humanism to today's inverted morality and totalitarian man. (Qutd. In Jasper 262)

As the "objective moral law which overarches rulers and ruled alike" continued to disappear with the belief in a transcendent God, human society began to witness the rise of "totalitarian man." Of course, the rise of relativism also saw the rise of mass irrationality. This mass irrationality, which is the natural corollary of relativistic thought, is especially prevalent in orthodox academia. This irrationality was most vividly illustrated during a discussion between Christian philosopher Ravi Zacharias and a group of students at Oxford University. Zacharias relates the details of this shocking discourse:

I asked a group of skeptics if I took a baby and sliced it to pieces before them, would I have done anything wrong? At my question, there was silence, and then the lead voice in the group said, "I would not like it, but no, I could not say you have done anything wrong." My! What an aesthete. He would not like it. My! What irrationality--he could not brand it wrong. (115)

What irrationality indeed! It is especially ironic that the very same school of skepticism that repeatedly asks the question, "How can there be a good God when there is so much evil in the world." How can one reject the existence of God on such grounds when one rejects moral absolutes in the same breath? Such thinking has been commensurate with the rise of scientific dictatorships during the 20th century.

On November 29, 1994, Stone Phillips conducted an interview [with the] infamous serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer. During the interview, Dahmer made a rather revealing confession:

"If a person doesn't think there is a God to be accountable to, then--then what's the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That's how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing. . ." (No pagination)

If this is how far humanity has traveled beyond the moral Rubicon, then the next step that the evolutionary Weltanschauung will take man is frightening indeed. Time and time again, history has demonstrated the consequences of relativistic thought. Perhaps the best historical example can be found in the Scriptures. Presented with a sinless man who was the obvious target of a malevolent conspiracy, Pilate merely responded, "What is truth?" (John 18:38). In the book Life of Christ, Fulton J. Sheen offers an eloquent summation of this response and its ramifications:

Then he [Pilate] turned his back on truth--better not on it, but on Him Who is Truth. It remained to be seen that tolerance of truth and error in a stroke of broadmindedness leads to intolerance and persecution; "What is truth?" when sneered, is followed up with the second sneer, "What is justice?" Broadmindedness, when it means indifference to right and wrong, eventually ends in a hatred of what is right. He who was so tolerant of error as to deny an Absolute Truth was the one who would crucify Truth. It was the religious judge who challenged Him, "I adjure thee;" but the secular judge asked, "What is truth?" He who was in the robe of the high priest called upon God the things that are God's; he who was in the Roman toga just professed a skepticism and doubt. (364)

Pilate's question was a rhetorical one, inferring that truth did not exist. Meanwhile, the Truth stood right before him, enveloped in a profound silence. Still, it was easier for Pilate to resort to the frivolity of pragmatism and utilitarianism. Despite the clear absence of evidence to convict this guiltless man of any crime, judicial protocol was circumvented and He was crucified. Of course, the Truth did not remain buried for very long.

Over two thousand years later, it would appear as though man has come no further. As moral absolutes are jettisoned in favor or relativism, technocratic social engineers continue to shape a totalitarian ethos. In Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley wrote:

. . .a new Social Ethic is replacing our traditional ethical system. . .the system in which the individual is primary. …the social whole has greater worth and significance than its individual parts. . .that the rights of the collectivity take precedence over. . .the Rights of Man. (23)

Nietzsche's world "beyond good and evil" is more closely akin to Skinner's world, which is "beyond freedom and dignity." As the moral Rubicon is traversed, so is the line separating freedom from slavery. It is a scientific dictatorship, dignified by Darwinism and built on the ashes of morality.

Sources Cited
Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World Revisited. New York: Bantam Books, 1958.
Jasper, William F. Global Tyranny. . .Step by Step: The United Nations and the Emerging New World Order.
Appleton, Wisconsin: Western Islands Publishers, 1992. Jones, E. Michael. Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control.
South Bend, Indiana: St. Augustine's Press, 2000.
Lewis, C.S. Christian Reflections.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1967. Pike, Albert. Morals and Dogma. 1871. Richmond, Virginia: L.H. Jenkins, Inc., 1942.
Quigley, Carroll.Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in our Time. New York: Macmillan, 1966.
Sheen, Fulton J. Life of Christ. New York: McGraw-Hill,1958.
Wells, Herbert George. The Outline of History: Being a Plain History of Life and Mankind. London: Cassell and Company Ltd., 1925. Zacharias, Ravi. Jesus Among Other Gods. Nashville, Tennessee: Word Publishing, 2000.

CLICK FOR PDF

THE VEIL OF MATERIALISM (From the Archies )

by Phillip D. Collins ©, FEB. 17th, 2006 - As the mists of antiquity gradually receded and history welcomed modernity, the old theocratic power structures were gradually supplanted by secular theocracies governed by science. No doubt, the chronocentric impulses of the contemporary mind compel many to consider this shift an advancement in “political, social, and cultural evolution.” However, although these new theocracies are veiled in secularism, it must be understood that their new state-sanctioned epistemology is a form of mysticism akin to its religious progenitor. This truth is illustrated by radical empiricism’s rejection of causality, which stipulates the investment of faith in the purported results of scientific research. Likewise, the new state-sanctioned metaphysics is equally mystical in character. Accompanying radical empiricism is materialism, the metaphysical contention that matter holds primacy.

Naturalism works in tandem with materialism because it attempts to sustain the primacy of matter with the metaphysical claim of “self-creation” (i.e., abiogenesis). Of course, this claim suggests that living and dead matter are inseparable. Thus, living things are literally artificial entities that create themselves, an occult theme communicated through the Kabalistic myth of the golem. In a universe where materialistic metaphysics hold sway, the biosphere and the life it supports amount to one enormous golem. Accompanying this contention is the Gnostic doctrine of “self-salvation.” If humanity is a god that created itself, then it is also responsible for its own salvation. Given these strange confluences of occult thought, materialism qualifies as little more than a new secular mysticism.

Not surprisingly, materialistic metaphysics pervade the fabric of many occult institutions. Even the acknowledgement of supra-sensible and incorporeal entities cannot hide the occultist’s materialistic propensities. In fact, such propensities may have given rise to the occultist’s mystical beliefs in the first place. Guenon explains:

Without seeking for the moment to determine more precisely the nature and quality of the supra-sensible, in so far as it is actually involved in this matter, it will be useful to observe how far the very people who still admit it and think that they are aware of its action are in reality penetrated by materialistic influence: for even if they do not deny all extra-corporeal reality, like the majority of their contemporaries, it is only because they have formed for themselves an idea of it which enables them in some way to assimilate it to the likeness of sensible things, and to do that is certainly scarcely better than to deny it. There is no reason to be surprised at this, considering the extent to which all the occultist, theosophist, and other schools of that sort are fond of searching assiduously for points of approach to modern scientific theories, from which they draw their inspiration more directly than they are prepared to admit; the result is what might logically be expected under such conditions. (153-54)

In this sense, materialism acts as a veil. The fact is that, although the occult theocracy of antiquity declined in power, it is still very much alive. It perpetuates itself through secularism. As sociologist William Sims Bainbridge makes clear, secularization actually represents the opening stage of an occult counterculture movement:

Secularization does not mean a decline in the need for religion, but only a loss of power by traditional denominations. Studies of the geography of religion show that where the churches become weak, cults and occultism explode to fill the spiritual vacuum. (“Religions for a Galactic Civilization”)

Thus, the thoroughly secularized society merely presages the emergence of a new theocratic order. The new ecclesiastical authority shall be occult in character, embracing what Guenon calls “neo-spiritualism” (155). The galvanizing mythology of this new theocratic order will most likely reflect the paradigmatic character of the Gnostic cosmology, depicting humanity as a collection of pluralities awaiting unification into a singularity through the sorcery of “science.” As for the dominant religion, it will be Luciferianism, which was initially disseminated on the popular level as secular humanism. This is anatomy of the emergent “Satanic state.”

In addition to facilitating the rise of a new occult theocracy, materialism has also contributed to the enormous volumes of bloodshed witnessed by the 20th century. Arguably, contemporary regimes premised upon dialectical materialism have murdered far more people than any traditional theocracy premised upon a theistic faith. This is directly attributable to materialism’s emphasis upon the primacy of matter. Materialistic metaphysics preclude the spirit, confining moral questions to the ontological plane of the physical universe. Severed from their ontological source, moral principles become tantamount to material phenomena. Thus, in a universe where materialism holds sway, it is reasonable to assume that evil is a purely corporeal entity that can be physically expunged. The ramifications of such an outlook are disturbing. In the article “What Evil Is and Why It Matters,” Christian philosopher John Paul Jones reveals the consequences of this Weltanschauung:

According to this [materialist] methodology, all we need do is find the material cause of evil and destroy it. After, all, since materialists assume all causes are material, they are logically obliged and conceptually predisposed to assume that evil is itself caused by material, physically destructible things or causes. (64)

The outgrowth of this paradigm is what Jones calls the “search and destroy” approach to dealing with evil (64). Jones expands on this approach:

Consequently, those of a materialist mindset, whether Christian or otherwise, are constantly engaged in campaigns to destroy the evil things or people they think are at the root of the problem. So we have, for example, the “war on drugs,” the “war on guns,” the “class war” and various genocides--all of which are known to cause more evil than they allegedly uproot, and today, as we witness the spread of eco-fascism in Europe that holds that we can solve the reputed environmental crisis by simply exterminating many millions of people, we also witness the approval of Chinese population control techniques, such as state-sanctioned abortion, infanticide, and forced sterilization. Strange fruits and bad apples, all. (64)

After years of war and waste, the materialist state is still incapable of expunging evil. This failure is directly attributable to materialism’s misappropriation of matter as the totality of reality. In light of this metaphysical error, one is still left to ponder the source of evil. Yet, Biblical wisdom, which the materialist thoroughly rejects, may have already answered the question of evil. James 4:1-10 states:

From whence come wars and fighting among you? Come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust and have not; ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain; ye fight and war, yet have not, because ye ask not. ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God? Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, the Spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? But he giveth more grace.

Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye doubleminded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep; let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

Of course, such a conclusion is unthinkable to the materialist. It is interesting that Charles Fort believed:

that man deliberately invented the dogma of materialism in order to shield himself from the evidence of what was being done to him by means of psycho-spiritual warfare methods hyped by “coincidence,” symbolism and ritual. (Hoffman 68)

A metaphysical smoke screen currently obstructs humanity’s view of the spiritual principles upon which so many of the world’s dilemmas rest. It is the veil of materialism.

Sources Cited:

1, Bainbridge, William Sims. "Religions for a Galactic Civilization." Excerpted from Science Fiction and Space Futures, edited by Eugene M. Emme. San Diego: American Astronautical Society, pages 187-201, 1982
2, Guenon, Rene. The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times. Trans. Lord Northbourne. Baltimore, Maryland: Penguin Books Inc, 1953.
3, Hoffman, Michael. Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare. Coeur d'Alene, Idaho: Independent History & Research, 2001.
4, Jones, John Paul. "What Evil Is and Why It Matters." Paranoia Magazine Issue 33 (2003): 62-64.

© 2006 Phillip D. Collins - All Rights Reserved

CLICK FOR THE PDF

Luciferianism: The Religion of Apotheosis (From the Archives)

WWW, January 2006 - Luciferianism constitutes the nucleus of the ruling class religion. While there are definitely political and economic rationales for elite criminality, Luciferianism can account for the longevity of many of the oligarchs' projects. Many of the longest and most brutal human endeavors have been underpinned by some form of religious zealotry. The Crusades testify to this historical fact. Likewise, the power elite's ongoing campaign to establish a socialist totalitarian global government has Luciferianism to thank for both its longevity and frequently violent character. In the mind of the modern oligarch, Luciferianism provides religious legitimacy for otherwise morally questionable plans.

Luciferianism is the product of religious engineering, which sociologist William Sims Bainbridge defines as "the conscious, systematic, skilled creation of a new religion" ("New Religions, Science, and Secularization," no pagination). In actuality, this is a tradition that even precedes Bainbridge. It has been the practice of Freemasonry for years. It was also the practice of Masonry's religious and philosophical progenitors, the ancient pagan Mystery cults. The inner doctrines of the Mesopotamian secret societies provided the theological foundations for the Christian and Judaic heresies, Kabbalism and Gnosticism. All modern Luciferian philosophy finds "scientific" legitimacy in the Gnostic myth of Darwinism. As evolutionary thought was popularized, variants of Luciferianism were popularized along with it (particularly in the form of secular humanism, which shall be examined shortly). A historical corollary of this popularization has been the rise of several cults and mass movements, exemplified by the various mystical sects and gurus of the sixties counterculture. The metastasis of Luciferian thinking continues to this very day.

Luciferianism represents a radical revaluation of humanity's ageless adversary: Satan. It is the ultimate inversion of good and evil. The formula for this inversion is reflected by the narrative paradigm of the Gnostic Hypostasis myth. As opposed to the original Biblical version, the Gnostic account represents a "revaluation of the Hebraic story of the first man's temptation, the desire of mere men to 'be as gods' by partaking of the tree of the 'knowledge of good and evil'" (Raschke 26). Carl Raschke elaborates:

In The Hypostasis of the Archons, an Egyptian Gnostic document, we read how the traditional story of man's disobedience toward God is reinterpreted as a universal conflict between "knowledge" (gnosis) and the dark "powers" (exousia) of the world, which bind the human soul in ignorance. The Hypostasis describes man as a stepchild of Sophia ("Wisdom") created according to the "model" of aion, the imperishable realm of eternity. On the other hand, it is neither God the Imperishable nor Sophia who actually is responsible in the making of man. On the contrary, the task is undertaken by the archons, the demonic powers who, because of their "weakness," entrap man in a material body and thus cut him off from his blessed origin. They place him in paradise and enjoin him against eating of the tree of knowledge. The prohibition, however, is viewed by the author of the text not as a holy command but as a malignant effort on the part of the inferior spirits to prevent Adam from having true communion with the High God, from gaining authentic gnosis. (26)

According to this bowdlerization, Adam is consistently contacted by the High God in hopes of reinitiating man's quest for gnosis (26). The archons intervene and create Eve to distract Adam from the pursuit of gnosis (26-27). However, this Gnostic Eve is actually a "sort of 'undercover' agent for the High God, who is charged with divulging to Adam the truth that has been withheld from him" (27). The archons manage to sabotage this covert operation by facilitating sexual intercourse between Adam and Eve, an act that Gnostics contend was designed to defile the "woman's spiritual nature" (27). At this juncture, the Hypostasis reintroduces a familiar antagonist from the original Genesis account:

But now the principle of feminine wisdom reappears in the form of the serpent, called the "Instructor," who tells the mortal pair to defy the prohibition of the archons and eat of the tree of knowledge. (27)

The serpent successfully entices Adam and Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, but the "bodily defilement" of the woman prevents man from understanding the true motive underpinning the act (27). Thus, humanity is fettered by the archons' "curse", suggesting that the "orthodox theological view of the violation of the command as 'sin' must be regarded anew as the mindless failure to commit the act rightly in the first place" (27). In this revisionist context, the serpent is no longer Satan, but is an "incognito savior" instead (27). Meanwhile, God's role as benevolent Heavenly Father is vilified:

The God of Genesis, who comes to reprimand Adam and Eve after their transgression, is rudely caricatured in this tale as the "Arrogant archon" who opposes the will of the authentic heavenly father. (27)

Of course, within this Gnostic narrative, God incarnate is equally belittled. Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh, is reduced to little more than a forerunner of the coming Gnostic adept. According to the Gnostic mythology, Jesus was but a mere "type" of this perfect man (27). He came as a "teacher and an exemplar, to show others the path to illumination" (27-28). The true messiah has yet to come. Equally, the serpent is only a precursor to this messiah. He only initiates man's journey towards gnosis. The developmental voyage must be further facilitated by the serpent's predecessor, the Gnostic Christ. The Hypostasis provides the paradigmatic template for all Luciferian mythologies.

Like the Hypostasis, the binary opposition of Luciferian mythology caricatures Jehovah as an oppressive tyrant. He becomes the "archon of arrogance," the embodiment of ignorance and religious superstition. Satan, who retains his heavenly title of Lucifer, is the liberator of humanity. Masonry, which acts as the contemporary retainer for the ancient Mystery religion, reconceptualizes Satan in a similar fashion. In Morals and Dogma, 33rd degree Freemason Albert Pike candidly exalts the fallen angel:

LUCIFER, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual, or selfish Souls? Doubt it not. (321)

He makes man aware of his own innate divinity and promises to unlock the god within us all. This theme of apotheosis underpinned both Gnosticism and the pagan Mystery religions. While Gnosticism's origins with the Ancient Mystery cults remains a source of contention amongst scholars, its promises of liberation from humanity's material side is strongly akin to the old pagan Mystery's variety of "psychic therapy" (28). In addition, the Ancient Mystery religion promised the:

opportunity to erase the curse of mortality by direct encounter with the patron deity, or in many instances by actually undergoing an apotheosis, a transfiguration of human into divine (28).

Like some varieties of Satanism, Luciferianism does not depict the devil as a literal metaphysical entity. Lucifer only symbolizes the cognitive powers of man. He is the embodiment of science and reason. It is the Luciferian's religious conviction that these two facilitative forces will dethrone God and apotheosize man. It comes as little surprise that the radicals of the early revolutionary faith celebrated the arrival of Darwinism. Evolutionary theory was the edifying "science" of Promethean zealotry and the new secular religion of the scientific dictatorship. According to Masonic scholar Wilmshurst, the completion of human evolution involves man "becoming a god-like being and unifying his consciousness with the Omniscient" (94).

During the Enlightenment, Luciferianism was disseminated on the popular level as secular humanism. All of the governing precepts of Luciferianism are encompassed by secular humanism. This is made evident by the philosophy's rejection of theistic morality and enthronement of man as his own absolute moral authority. While Luciferianism has no sacred texts, Humanist Manifesto I and II succinctly delineate its central tenets. Whittaker Chambers, former member of the communist underground in America, eloquently summarizes this truth:

"Humanism is not new. It is, in fact, man's second oldest faith. Its promise was whispered in the first days of Creation under the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil: 'Ye shall be as gods.'" (Qutd. in Baker 206)

Transhumanism offers an updated, hi-tech variety of Luciferianism. The appellation "Transhumanism" was coined by evolutionary biologist Julian Huxley ("Transhumanism," Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia, no pagination). Huxley defined the transhuman condition as "man remaining man, but transcending himself, by realizing new possibilities of and for his human nature" (no pagination). However, by 1990, Dr. Max More would radically redefine Transhumanism as follows:

Transhumanism is a class of philosophies that seek to guide us towards a posthuman condition. Transhumanism shares many elements of humanism, including a respect for reason and science, a commitment to progress, and a valuing of human (or transhuman) existence in this life… Transhumanism differs from humanism in recognizing and anticipating the radical alterations in the nature and possibilities of our lives resulting from various sciences and technologies… (No pagination)

Transhumanism advocates the use of nanotechnology, biotechnology, cognitive science, and information technology to propel humanity into a "posthuman" condition. Once he has arrived at this condition, man will cease to be man. He will become a machine, immune to death and all the other "weaknesses" intrinsic to his former human condition. The ultimate objective is to become a god. Transhumanism is closely aligned with the cult of artificial intelligence. In the very influential book The Age of Spiritual Machines, AI high priest Ray Kurzweil asserts that technological immortality could be achieved through magnetic resonance imaging or some technique of reading and replicating the human brain's neural structure within a computer ("Technological Immortality," no pagination). Through the merger of computers and humans, Kurzweil believes that man will "become god-like spirits inhabiting cyberspace as well as the material universe" (no pagination).

Following the Biblical revisionist tradition of the Gnostic Hypostasis myth, Transhumanists invert the roles of God and Satan. In an essay entitled "In Praise of the Devil," Transhumanist ideologue Max More depicts Lucifer as a heroic rebel against a tyrannical God:

The Devil—Lucifer—is a force for good (where I define 'good' simply as that which I value, not wanting to imply any universal validity or necessity to the orientation). 'Lucifer' means 'light-bringer' and this should begin to clue us in to his symbolic importance. The story is that God threw Lucifer out of Heaven because Lucifer had started to question God and was spreading dissension among the angels. We must remember that this story is told from the point of view of the Godists (if I may coin a term) and not from that of the Luciferians (I will use this term to distinguish us from the official Satanists with whom I have fundamental differences). The truth may just as easily be that Lucifer resigned from heaven. (No pagination)

According to More, Lucifer probably exiled himself out of moral outrage towards the oppressive Jehovah:

God, being the well-documented sadist that he is, no doubt wanted to keep Lucifer around so that he could punish him and try to get him back under his (God's) power. Probably what really happened was that Lucifer came to hate God's kingdom, his sadism, his demand for slavish conformity and obedience, his psychotic rage at any display of independent thinking and behavior. Lucifer realized that he could never fully think for himself and could certainly not act on his independent thinking so long as he was under God's control. Therefore he left Heaven, that terrible spiritual-State ruled by the cosmic sadist Jehovah, and was accompanied by some of the angels who had had enough courage to question God's authority and his value-perspective. (No pagination)

More proceeds to reiterate 33rd Degree Mason Albert Pike's depiction of Lucifer:

Lucifer is the embodiment of reason, of intelligence, of critical thought. He stands against the dogma of God and all other dogmas. He stands for the exploration of new ideas and new perspectives in the pursuit of truth. (No pagination)

Lucifer is even considered a patron saint by some Transhumanists ("Transtopian Symbolism," no pagination). Transhumanism retains the paradigmatic character of Luciferianism, albeit in a futurist context. Worse still, Transhumanism is hardly some marginalized cult. Richard Hayes, executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society, elaborates:

Last June at Yale University, the World Transhumanist Association held its first national conference. The Transhumanists have chapters in more than 20 countries and advocate the breeding of "genetically enriched" forms of "post-human" beings. Other advocates of the new techno-eugenics, such as Princeton University professor Lee Silver, predict that by the end of this century, "All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry [will be] controlled by members of the GenRich class. . .Naturals [will] work as low-paid service providers or as laborers. . ." (No pagination)

With a growing body of academic luminaries and a techno-eugenical vision for the future, Transhumanism is carrying the banner of Luciferianism into the 21st century. Through genetic engineering and biotechnological augmentation of the physical body, Transhumanists are attempting to achieve the very same objective of their patron saint.

I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. (Isaiah 14:13-14)

This declaration reflects the aspirations of the power elite as well. Whatever form the Luciferian religion assumes throughout the years, its goal remains the same: Apotheosis.

Sources Cited

• Bainbridge, William Sims. "New Religions, Science, and Secularization." Excerpted from Religion and the Social Order, 1993, Volume 3A, pages 277-292, 1993.
• Baker, Jeffrey. Cheque Mate: The Game of Princes. Springdale, PA: Whitaker House, 1995.
• Hayes, Richard. "Selective Science." TomPaine.commonsense 12 February 2004.
• More, Max. "Transhumanism: Towards a Futurist Philosophy." Maxmore.com 1996
  • "In Praise of the Devil." Lucifer.com 1999
• Pike, Albert. Morals and Dogma. 1871. Richmond, Virginia: L.H. Jenkins, Inc., 1942.
• Raschke, Carl A. The Interruption of Eternity: Modern Gnosticism and the Origins of the New Religious Consciousness. Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1980.
• "Transhumanism." Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 8 January 2006
• "Transtopian Symbolism." Transtopia: Transhumanism Evolved 2003-2005
• Wilmshurst, W.L. The Meaning of Masonry. New York: Gramercy, 1980.

About the Author

Phillip D. Collins acted as the editor for The Hidden Face of Terrorism. He has also written articles for Paranoia Magazine, MKzine, News With Views, B.I.P.E.D.: The Official Website of Darwinian Dissent and Conspiracy Archive. He has an Associate of Arts and Science. Currently, he is studying for a bachelor's degree in Communications at Wright State University. During the course of his seven-year college career, Phillip has studied philosophy, religion, and classic literature. He also co-authored the book, The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination of Epistemic Autocracy, From the 19th to the 21st Century, which is available online here. He also moderates the Yahoo discussion group "Panoptic Age."

PDF FILE OF THIS ARTICLE

Vatikan Takes Control over Jerusalem Sites (From the Archives)

BABYLON OBSERVER, DECEMBER 20, 2005 - Israeli researcher Barry Chamish has revealed that the Vatikan and the Pope have made an agreement with the Israeli State to have the Roman Catholic Church take control over various places in the nation's capital.

In a revealing interview with a well known historian, he puts this all into the right context and it turns out, that the events are driven out of an old desire to revive "Holy Roman Empire" with Jerusalem as capital.

---

MOUNT ZION COVETED BY ROME

by Barry Chamish

18 Dec 2005

Just a few weeks ago, the following was the issue of the day in Israel:

http://www.isfsp.org/zion-docs.html
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=91526
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0%2C%2C13509-1823149%2C00html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/642171.html

Report: Israel to hand control of Jerusalem holy site
to Vatican
Haaretz November 6, 2005
By Amiram Barkat
Israel is to give the Vatican control over one of the
most sacred Christian sites in Jerusalem, several
European newspapers have reported recently. According
to the reports, Israel will give the Holy See
possession of the Coenaculum, or the Room of the Last
Supper (also known as the Upper Room or the Cenacle),
on Mount Zion.

In response to the news, I wrote an article which proved the handover of the Old City of Jerusalem was a done deal. In fact, it was one of the secret clauses of the first Oslo "peace" accord signed by the Israeli government.
A week after, I received a phone call from a rabbi of the Diaspora Yeshiva. He explained that the Tourism Minister was visiting their school the next day and he was trying to fill the study hall to prove to the government that their yeshiva was too valuable to be given away.
I replied that I would not partake in such a spectacle. I might come if the students forcibly barred the Minister or any government official from entering the property. Hadn't he learned anything from Gush Katif? The government of Israel couldn't care less about him and could care even less how many students he can pack into a room. Mount Zion was a litmus test of how much opposition the government and its corrupted army could expect when all of the Old City was turned over to the Vatican.
He said I must talk to the headmaster of the Yeshiva, Rabbi Goldstein.
An hour later, I was honored by a call from Rabbi Goldstein. Soon, however, I was in despair. As far as he knew, the Vatican wanted to turn his school into a money making tourist site and the Ministry of Tourism was being enticed by the prospects of millions of Catholic tourists visiting Israel to see the Last Supper room.
I did my best to wake the Rabbi. I told him that tourism was the facade, not the issue. I tried to explain the global forces using their muscle to get the Jews out of Jerusalem's holy sites. I noted that the government of Israel was the worst enemy of Judaism and that he must block the entrance of their representative with whatever force he could muster.
However, as with the Rabbis of Gush Katif, my words were wasted. Mount Zion will give up without a real fight. You watch.
Nonetheless, the truth marches on. A brilliant Jerusalem-based German-born historian, Dr. Asher Edar, also honored me with a conversation. Vive le difference:

BC - Why is the Vatican suddenly so interested in getting its hands on Mount Zion real estate?

AE - There's nothing sudden about it at all. In fact, the roots of the desire go back 1200 years to the time of Charlemagne. He was the Vatican's military tool for converting Europe to Roman Catholicism.
He succeed magnificently and created what is known as the Holy Roman Empire but what was then called The Holy Roman Empire Of The German Nation. Charlemagne's capital was at Aachen and there he built his first cathedral.

BC - Excuse me but, so?

AE - Next to the yeshiva on Mount Zion is the Dormition Abbey, built by the Germans starting in 1906. It is an exact duplicate of Charlemagne's Aachen Cathedral.

BC - How did that happen?

AE - Kaiser Wilhelm II came to Jerusalem in 1898 to build two churches, a modest Lutheran Church of minor religious significance and a magnificent Catholic structure on Mount Zion. In 1898, the ruler of a nation didn't make such a difficult journey to a diplomatic backwater unless it was extremely important. The Vatican was worried that the British had an operating church in Jerusalem and its presence could solidify and spread. The Vatican provided much of the funds for the trip and the bribe to the Turkish Sultan, Khamid. Since Wilhelm had a Protestant population to appease, he put up a smaller Lutheran church as well, but the real prize was Mount Zion.

BC - Why all the money and trouble if the Vatican gets the real estate? What was in it for Germany?

AE - Germany has never given up its dream of reviving the Holy Roman Empire. At the height of that empire, their greatest king, Frederick the Great, marched into Jerusalem and became the city's king. Jerusalem was once part of the Holy Roman Empire and the dream is that it will be again. In this empire, the delineation of powers was strict. The pope was the spiritual leader, but the political leader was whoever ruled Germany. This dream led straight to World War I.

BC - Where do the Jews fit in all this?

AE - Nowhere. Herzl tried to get a role for the Jews and met with Wilhelm in Jerusalem. Wilhelm would have nothing to do with him. His goal was to save Jerusalem for a Christendom led politically by Germany and spiritually by Rome. Nothing has changed except now the pope is a determined German. The Vatican want the Jews out of the Old City and apparently our government is agreeing with them.

Now a history lesson with little comment:

LINK
Encyclopedia-Frederick II, Holy Roman emperor and German king
King of Jerusalem
Having married (1225) Yolande, daughter of John of Brienne, he claimed the crown of Jerusalem, but again postponed his departure on crusade. He further offended the pope by reasserting at the Diet of Cremona (1226) the imperial claim to Lombardy. The Lombard League was immediately revived, but open conflict did not break out until 1236. On the insistent demand of the new pope, Gregory IX, Frederick embarked on a crusade (Sept., 1227), but fell ill, turned back, and was excommunicated.
In 1228 he finally embarked. His -crusade,- actually a state visit, was a diplomatic victory. At Jaffa he made a treaty by which Jerusalem, Nazareth, and Bethlehem were surrendered to the Christians, with the Mosque of Omar being left to the Muslims. In 1229 he crowned himself king at Jerusalem.

LINK
In 1226, by means of the Golden Bull of Rimini he confirmed the legitimacy of rule by the Teutonic Knights under their headmaster Hermann von Salza over the Prussian lands east of the Vistula, the Chelmno Land.
At the time he was crowned Emperor, Frederick had promised to go on crusade. In preparation for his crusade, Frederick had, in 1225, married Yolande of Jerusalem, heiress to the Kingdom of Jerusalem, and immediately taken steps to take control of the Kingdom from his new father-in-law, John of Brienne. However, he continued to take his time in setting off, and in 1227, Frederick was excommunicated by Pope Gregory IX for failing to honor his crusading pledge - perhaps unfairly, at this point, as his plans had been delayed by an epidemic. He eventually embarked on the crusade the following year (1228), which was seen on by the pope as a rude provocation, since the church could not take any part in the honor for the crusade, resulting in a second excommunication. Frederick did not attempt to take Jerusalem by force of arms. Instead, he negotiated restitution of Jerusalem, Nazareth, and Bethlehem to the Kingdom with sultan Al-Kamil, the Ayyubid ruler of the region.

LINK

THE TEUTONIC ORDER OF HOLY MARY IN JERUSALEM

Some forty knights were received into the new Order at its foundation by the King of Jerusalem and Frederick of Swabia, who selected their first Master in the name of the Pope and Emperor. The knights of the new confraternity had to be of German birth (although this rule was occasionally relaxed), a unique requirement among the Crusader Orders founded in the Holy Land. They were drawn predominately from the noble or knightly class, although this latter obligation was not formally incorporated into the rule until much later. Their blue mantle, charged with a black cross, was worn over a white tunic, a uniform recognized by the Patriarch of Jerusalem and confirmed by the Pope in 1211. The waves of German knights and pilgrims who followed the Third Crusade brought considerable wealth to the new German Hospital as well as recruits. This enabled the knights to acquire the Lordship of Joscelin and, soon thereafter they built the castle of Montfort (lost in 1271), the rival of the great hospitaller fortress of Krak des Chevaliers. Never as numerous in the Holy Land as either the Hospitaller or Templar Orders, the Teutonic knights were nonetheless a formidable power.

LINK

THE EQUESTRIAN ORDER OF THE HOLY SEPULCHER OF JERUSALEM
© Guy Stair Sainty

The origins of the Order of the Holy Sepulcher have been disputed for centuries. In this examination of the history of what is today a major Catholic Order of Knighthood, under the direct protection of the Holy See, it has been my intention to separate fact from fantasy and outline the historical development of this great institution. It now has a world-wide mission to support the Holy Places, particularly in Jerusalem, and has approximately eighteen thousand members across the globe.

Two Christian sources who are certain the goal of the "peace" process is to establish a German/Vatican capital in Jerusalem are David Ben-Ariel, and the Philadelphia Trumpet:

LINK
Looking to Jerusalem

We have also said that the next pope would have his sights set on Jerusalem. Ratzinger was known for statements he made concerning a reconciliation of sorts with the Jews. That reconciliation being, the moment in which Israel too will say yes to Christ.After all, the star points to Jerusalem, Ratzinger said once. Watch for this new pope to have a more fervent interest in Israeli politics and affairs surrounding Jerusalem.

First let's understand Aachen Cathedral's history:

LINK
Aachen Aachen in north-western Germany (in French, called Aix-la-Chapelle), was the capital of Charlemagne's empire in the 9th century. It became the site of one of the great medieval pilgrimages because of the textile relics obtained by Charlemagne and Ortho III. The four Great Relics include the cloak of the Blessed Virgin, the swaddling clothes of the infant Jesus, the cloth on which St. John the Baptist's head lay after his beheading, and the loin cloth which Jesus wore on the Cross. These four relics were shown only once every seven years.

LINK

CATHOLIC COMMUNITIES HAVE UNIQUE LINK WITH ROME AND JERUSALEM
John Paul II's Letter for 1,200 Years of Aachen Cathedral
VATICAN CITY, JAN 31 (ZENIT).- John Paul II referred to the ties that unite the Catholic community spread over the world with the Church of Rome and the Holy City of Jerusalem, in a letter to commemorate 1,200 years since the construction of Aachen Cathedral, an event which was celebrated last Saturday and Sunday in this historic German locality.
The Pope's special envoy to the celebration was Cardinal Dar?o Castrill?n Hoyos, prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy. The Holy Father addressed the letter to Bishop Heinrich Mussinghoff of Aachen. John Paul II pointed out that the Cathedral, dedicated to the Virgin, was built at the request of Charlemagne. That same year, 800, the emporer was crowned in Rome by Pope Leo III in the Vatican Basilica. This historical event reflects the closeness that existed between that local Church and the diocese of Rome.
But Aachen Cathedral has yet "another link" that carries it "with heart and mind" to the Holy City. These are 4 precious relics that Jerusalem gave to Charlemagne and that recall "with profound reverence events in the history of salvation." The 4 relics are fragments of the newborn Jesus' diapers, the cloth Jesus wore around his waist on the cross, the dress Mary wore on Christmas Eve, and the cloth of John the Baptist's beheading.

Now, we have a look at Aachen Cathedral:

LINK

Next, we look at the Dormition Abbey on Mount Zion:

LINK

Surprise! It's an exact copy of the first church built by Charlemagne, founder of the Holy Roman Empire.

Conflicting Agendas!

Mount Zion and Dormition Abbey, JerusalemMount Zion lies to the south of today's city walls. Coming out of Zion Gate you are faced with the Benedictine Basilica of the Dormition. The Dormition Abbey is a massive structure that rises on Mount Zion, just outside the Zion Gate, and resembles a mighty fortress; it is topped by a high, domed belltower, a conical dome and corner towers. This Benedictine Basilica, built over the site where Virgin Mary is said to have fallen asleep for the last time (Dormitio - from here one of the apocryphal writings describing this event). It was completed by Kaiser Wilhelm II at the beginning of 20th century based on plans by Heinrich Renard who used as a model the Carolingian cathedral of Aix-la-Chapelle. http://www.christusrex.org/www1/jvc/TVCcenac.html The Room of the Last Supper lies just outside the Dormition Abbey behind the Franciscan house on Sion. The whole area has been transformed by religious Jews into various Yeshivas (Schools of the Torah) especially due to the devotion for the Tomb of King David which is believed to be located beneath the Upper Room. Germany Rejects The Jews Not For The Last Time

http://www.jafi.org.il/education/100/act/14zion.html
When Herzl met the Duke of Baden, the Kaiser's uncle, he tried to persuade him of the importance of a meeting with Kaiser Wilhelm for the Zionist cause. After more than one and a half years of fruitless contacts with influential German figures, Herzl was called to the German consul during a stay in Amsterdam and informed that the German Kaiser was prepared to meet him on his journey to Jerusalem.
Kaiser Wilhelm II's first stop on his journey to the land of Israel was at Kushta. In October 1898, Herzl traveled to Kushta, where he met with the Kaiser for the first time and received a promise of a subsequent meeting in Jerusalem.
Herzl and his companions went up to Jerusalem in an optimistic frame of mind to wait the second meeting, which took place on November 2. His frosty reception by the Kaiser and the lack of protocol led Herzl to realize that the German monarch had withdrawn his initial offer of support for Jewish settlement in the land of Israel.

For the rejection of Herzl and the race against Britain for Jerusalem real estate, Turkey and Germany paid a heavy price. In 1910, the Dormition Abbey was completed. Within a decade, Germany and Turkey were defeated in all out war, and Britain was in Jerusalem alongside Herzl's Jews.

Then came the Holocaust.

end

If you are interested in helping out in any way, call David Rutstein 052 6694999.
Long Distance; 011 972 526694999.
Or write me and tell me how you'd like to help

Each and every Israeli Knesset member knows that the real killers of Yitzhak Rabin are free!
Individuals must make the effort to email, fax, call or personally visit these Knesset members and demand justice for the killers of Yitzhak Rabin and so many others.
"Our hands hath not shed the blood..."
List of Knesset members

BARRY CHAMISH.COM

CLICK FOR THE PDF OF THIS ARTICLE

Jewish extremists may crash plane on Temple Mount (From the Archives)

Last Update: 25/07/2004 04:00

Officials: Jewish extremists may crash plane on Temple Mount

By Jonathan Lis, Yuval Yoaz and Nadav Shragai

WWW, 2004 (Archived) - Israeli security officials have recently become increasingly concerned that right-wing extremists might be plotting an attack on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem to derail Israel's planned withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. The Shin Bet security service and the police are preparing for a number of possible terror attack scenarios at the sacred Old City site, Israeli security sources said on Saturday night.

Speaking on the Channel Two "Meet the Press" program yesterday, Public Security Minister Tzachi Hanegbi confirmed that the security establishment had identified rising intent among right-wing extremists to carry out a Temple Mount attack.

"There is no information about specific individuals, because the Shin Bet and police would not let them continue [with their plot]," said Hanegbi. "But there are troubling indications of purposeful thinking, and not detached philosophy... There is a danger that [extremists] would make use of the most explosive site, in the hope that a chain reaction would bring about the destruction of the peace process."

Security sources on Saturday night said possible actions included an attempt to crash a drone packed with explosives on the Temple Mount, or a manned suicide attack with a light aircraft during mass Muslim worship on the Mount. Other possibilities include an attempt by right-wing extremists to assassinate a prominent Temple Mount Muslim leader, perhaps from the Waqf Islamic trust.

Israeli security sources speculate that the assassination scenario might be chosen, even though it would not cause mass injury or damage to the Al-Aqsa mosque or the Golden Dome shrine. The aim of the Temple Mount attack conspiracy, they said, would be to carry out a visible provocation that sparked violent confrontation in the territories.

Due to stringent security routines at the Temple Mount, Israeli security officials said Saturday, right-wing extremists would find it virtually impossible to use conventional routes to penetrate the site with explosives. Hence, the possibility of a large bomb being planted at one of the Muslim holy sites is "a lower-level possibility."

Saturday's disclosures about possible Temple Mount terror plans were preceded in recent months by a number of troubling indications. Nine months ago a suspect in a Jewish underground terror group affair, Shahar Dvir-Zeliger, told authorities a prominent West Bank settler activist had planned a Temple Mount attack. Zeliger cited two other names of West Bank settlers, suggesting the two were involved in the Temple Mount attack conspiracy.

Last Thursday, the Temple Mount Faithful group petitioned the High Court, asking to be given clearance to go up to the Holy Site for prayers later this week for Tisha B'Av.

CLICK FOR PDF FILE

YALE'S SKULL & BONES SOCIETY MEMBERS (From the Archives)

By Eric Samuelson, J.D.
janeric@concentric.net

WWW, 2006 (Archived) - I am presently researching a biography on David Rockefeller. An overview of the book will soon be sent to a New York City agent for circulation among all the major publishing houses. Among the topics that will be covered is the role of British USA Round Table member Rep. Wayne Hays (Demo-Ohio) in "killing" the Reece Committee investigation of tax-exempt foundations, the disappearance of the research on the Rockefeller-funded Kinsey studies and the "disposal" threats made to Reece Investigator Norman Dodd by a lobbyist for the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

In 1986, Hoover scholar Antony C. Sutton published his "magnum opus" - AMERICA'S SECRET ESTABLISHMENT: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE ORDER OF SKULL AND BONES. In his preface Sutton said he had been given an eight-inch batch of documents which was "nothing less than the membership lists of an American secret society. Glancing through the sheets it was more than obvious--this was no ordinary group. The names spelled Power with a capital P." Throughout the book Sutton hinted at even deeper revelations he would make in books to come. However, the full list never was published by Sutton. In making inquiries of those who knew Sutton, I was told that he had become exiled in his own country. For months I searched the Web looking for a list of the members of Skull and Bones. At long last, a notebook was given to me which required the use of a magnifying glass to make out the names. So, the following semi-final list is about 97% accurate. It opens the door to the Bones realm at a time that one of their own is now hitting the campaign trail for the Republican presidential nomination.

For about the past ten years I have been studying secret elite groups. The average person has almost no knowledge of them and there are very few sources of information. These secret groups include the Bilderbergers, the Council on Foreign Relations, The Knights of the Garter, The Knights of Malta, The 33rd Degree Masons, the Rhodes Scholars, The Skull and Bones and the Trilateral Commission. What is needed is a historical roster of the membership of each of these groups.

The list that follows is only the first of an upcoming series of historic exposes of these secret societies. If you have any biographical information on any of these individuals, your sharing will be appreciated and reciprocated. Any suggestions or corrections appreciated.

---

SURNAME GIVEN NAME S&B YEAR

CLICK HERE FOR A PDF FILE WITH BETTER LAY-OUT

Abbe Frederick Randolph 1848
Abbott John S.C.
Aberg, Jr. Donlan Vincent 1952
Abrams Peter Mark 1983
Acheson David Campion 1943
Ackerman Stephen H. 1957
Acosta John Sidney 1921
Adams Charles Edward 1904
Adams Charles Hemmenway 1866
Adams Frederick Baldwin 1862
Adams Frederick Baldwin 1900
Adams George Webster 1904
Adams Lewis G. 1920
Adams Mason Tyler 1899
Adams Stephen 1959
Adams, Jr. Frederick Baldwin 1932
Afeiju Bernard I. 1967
Ahlbrandt, Jr. Roger S. 1963
Aiken Edwin Edgerton 1881
Aitchison William 1848
Albritton Paul Berem 1978
Aldis Owen Franklin 1874
Aldrich Malcolm Pratt 1922
Alexander Eben 1873
Alexander William DeWitt 1855
Alexander William Felix 1851
Ali Mehdi Raza 1965
Allen Arthur Dwight 1901
Allen Arthur Huntington 1873
Allen Calvin Durand 1913
Allen Charles E. 1958
Allen Daniel 1926
Allen Frederick Winthrop 1900
Allen Henry Elisha 1924
Allen John DeWitt Hamilton 1876
Allen Parker Breese 1919
Allen Walter 1863
Allen William Palmer 1880
Allen, Jr. Archibald J. 1945
Allen, Jr. Clarence Emir 1913
Alling, Jr. Charles Booth 1947
Allison Samuel Perkins 1847
Allison, Jr. Robert Seaman 1930
Ames Allan Wallace 1918
Ames Sullivan Dobb 1899
Amundson John Arnold 1880
Anderson Edwin Alexander 1835
Anderson Thomas Hill 1951
Andrews John Wolcott 1876
Andrews, Jr. Edward W. 1945W
Andrews, Jr. John Wallingford 1870
Andrie Paul James 1984
Anthony Benjamin Harris 1886
Appel George Frederick Baer 1924
Ardrey Rushton L. 1925
Arms Charles Jesup 1863
Arnot John Hulett 1885
Arnot Matthias Hollenback 1856
Arras, Jr. Robert E. 1969
Asburn Frank Davis 1925
Ashe Victor Henderson 1967
Ashenfelter Alan Thompson 1975
Ashforth Albert Blackhurst 1929
Ashley Thomas William Ludlow 1948
Austen David E. 1931
Austin Roy Leslie 1968
Austin Samuel Monroe 1980
Avery Benjamin F. 1914
Avery Charles Hammond 1875
Aycrigg II William Anderson 1942
Ayeroff Frederick Charles 1974
Babcock Henry Harper 1853
Babst James Anthony 1971
Back Samuel H. 1962
Backus Joseph Willes 1846
Bacon Leonard
Badger Paul Bradford 1911
Badger Walter Irving 1882
Bailey Philip Horton 1897
Baker Richard Wheeler 1913
Baldridge Howard Malcolm 1918
Baldwin George William 1853
Baldwin Henry DeForest 1885
Baldwin Roger Sherman 1847
Baldwin Sherman 1919
Baldwin Simeon Eren 1861
Ball David George 1960
Banks Howard D. 1956
Bannard Henry Clay 1869
Bannard Otto Tremont 1876
Baran Mark R. 1978
Barasch Alan Sidney 1973
Baratte Julius Adolphus 1843
Barge Richard Mason 1974
Baribault Richard P. 1949
Barker George Payson 1856
Barlett John Knowlton 1838
Barlett Philip Golden 1881
Barnes Pearce 1874
Barnes William Deluce 1907
Barnes William Henry Lienow 1855
Barney Danford Newton 1881
Barnum William Milo 1877
Barr, Jr. Richard J. 1936
Barres Herster B.D. 1932
Barry William Taylor Sullivan 1841
Bartholemy Alan Edmund 1942
Bartholomew Dana Treat 1928
Bass James Edward 1982
Basset II Barton Bradley 1949
Bassi Keith Alan 1978
Bates Emmert Warren 1932
Bates Samuel Henshaw 1833
Bayard Thomas Francis 1890
Bayne Hugh Aiken 1892
Bayne Thomas Levingston 1847
Bayne-Jones Stanhope 1910
Beach John Campell 1833
Beach John Sheldon 1839
Beane, Jr. Frank Eastman 1960
Beard Anson McCook 1895
Beard William Mossgrove 1896
Beaumont George Anson Oliver 1834
Becket G. Campbell 1923
Becket Peter Logan 1963
Beckley John Werle 1860
Beebe William 1873
Beers Henry Augustin 1869
Begg William Reynolds 1893
Beirne Christopher James 1840
Belin Gaspard d'Andelot 1939
Bell Richard Dobbs Spaight 1844
Bell William Tompkins 1942
Bellinger Alfred Rammond 1917
Bellis Jon Michael 1974
Bellis Tedric Lawrence 1973
Beman Henry DeWitt 1851
Bench Edward C. 1925
Bender Kenneth Arthur 1975
Benedict Theodore Hudson 1840
Bennetto John 1887
Benninghoff Harry Bryner 1954
Benoit, Jr. Charles Edward 1965
Bent Joseph Appleton 1865
Bentley Edward Manross 1880
Bentley Edward Warren 1850
Benton Joseph Augustine 1842
Berger, Jr. George Bart 1928
Berry Coburn Dewees 1868
Bertron Samuel Reading 1885
Best Geoffry D.C. 1964
Biddle Thomas Bradish 1839
Bigelow Albert 1852
Bigelow Walter Irving 1877
Biglow Lucius Horatio 1908
Biglow, Jr. Lucius Horatio 1948
Bingham Charles Tiffany 1928
Bingham Egert Byron 1863
Bingham Jonathan Brewster 1936
Birge Robert Richards 1968
Bisaro Larry R. 1974
Bishop Noah 1833
Bissel Arthur Douglas 1867
Bissel Wilson Shannon 1869
Bissell George Thomas 1961
Bissell William Truesdale 1925
Blackman Charles Seymour 1857
Blackman Samuel Curtis 1854
Blaine Walker 1876
Blair Edwin Foster 1924
Blair James Grant 1925
Blair William McCormick 1907
Blake Dexter B. 1937
Blake Edward Foster 1858
Blake Eli Whitney 1857
Blake Henry T. 1848
Blake Henry Taylor 1848
Blake, Jr. Gilman Dorr 1945
Blakely Marvin 1977
Blakeslee Henry Clay 1852
Blanchard Jerred Gurley 1939
Blattner Robert William 1976
Bliss Charles Miller 1852
Bliss Robert 1850
Bliss William Root 1850
Blodgett George Reddington 1884
Blue Linden S. 1958
Boasberg III Emanuel 1956
Bockrath, Jr. Richard C. 1961
Bockstoce John R. 1966
Bodman William Camp 1959
Boies Charles Alred 1860
Boltwood Edward 1860
Boltwood Edward 1892
Boltwood Thomas Kast 1864
Booth Samuel Albert 1884
Booth Wilbur Franklin 1884
Borden Matthew Chaloner Durfee 1864
Boren David Lyle 1963
Bottum Elisha Slocum 1876
Boulos (Bouliaratis) William M. 1947
Bouscaren Michael Frederic 1969
Bowers Lloyd Wheaton 1879
Bowle, Jr. William Carter 1961
Bowles Henry Thornton 1899
Bowles John Eliot 1935
Bowman Ralph David 1957
Boyd Francis T. 1912
Boyden Henry Paine 1864
Bradford Amory Howe 1934
Bradford Arthur Howe 1905
Bradford Timothy McFall 1967
Bradley Charles Harvey 1921
Brand James 1866
Brandegee Augustus 1849
Brandegee Frank Bosworth 1885
Brandt John Henry 1962
Breed Edward Andrews 1844
Breen J. Gerald 1950
Bremmer Samuel Kimball 1886
Breslau Jonathan 1982
Brewster Benjamin 1882
Brewster Chauncey Bunce 1868
Brewster Walter Rice 1921
Brewster IV James Henry 1962
Brickell James Noaille 1845
Bridgman John Cloyse 1885
Brinsmade Horatio Walsh 1851
Brisrin John Ball 1846
Bristol Louis Henry 1859
Brodhead Henry 1859
Bronson David Bennet 1947
Bronson James Davis 1926
Brooke Frederick Hiester 1899
Brooke George Clymer 1897
Brooke, Jr. Frederick H. 1937
Brooks Henry Stanford 1885
Brooks James Wilton 1875
Brooks John Edward 1865
Brooks Peter Moody 1983
Brooks Tristam Anthony 1982
Brooks Walter 1877
Brown Alexander 1896
Brown Alexander Lardner 1869
Brown Christopher Walworth 1968
Brown George Clifford 1966
Brown Henry Armitt 1865
Brown Hubert Sanford 1861
Brown Jamot 1899
Brown John Mason 1856
Brown Joseph Venen 1842
Brown Robert Nelson 1979
Brown Samuel Taylor Glover 1944
Brown Walter Henderson 1945W
Brown William Scott 1970
Brubaker James Robert 1977
Brubaker John Kim 1976
Bruce Donald 1906
Bryan James Taylor 1971
Bryan, Jr. L. Thomas 1955
Buchanan Thomas Walter 1889
Buck III Charles Henry 1969
Buckland Joseph Payson 1857
Buckley Fercus Reid 1952
Buckley James Lane 1944
Buckley, Jr. William Frank 1950
Buckner Mortimer Norton 1895
Bulkey Jonathan Ogden 1923
Bulkey Tuzar 1865
Bull Cornelius Wade 1863
Bullock Stanton B. 1981
Bumstead Nathaniel Willis 1855
Bundy Frederick McGeorge 1921
Bundy Harvey Hollister 1909
Bundy Hollister 1909
Bundy McGeorge 1940
Bundy William Putman 1939
Bunnell Phil W. 1927
Burch Robert Boyd 1909
Burke III James Eugene 1975
Burke, Jr. Charles Clinton 1937
Burkus Gregory James 1982
Burnham Curtis Field 1840
Burpee Charles Winslow 1883
Burpee Lucien Francis 1879
Burr William Shedden 1834
Burr II Charles B. 1962
Burrell Joseph Dunn 1881
Burtt Edwin Authur 1915
Bush Derek C. 1967
Bush George Herbert Walker 1948
Bush George Walker 1968
Bush James S. 1922
Bush Jonathan 1953
Bush Prescott Sheldon 1917
Bushnell Samuel Clarke 1874
Bushnell William Benedick 1865
Butler Francis Eugene 1857
Butler John Haskell 1863
Butterworth Frank Seiler 1895
Buttles Albert Barnes 1842
Cable Benjamin Stickney 1895
Caldwell Samuel Smith 1933
Calhoun Governeur 1891
Callahan Hugh Andrew 1899
Came Charles Green 1849
Camp Arthur Goodwin 1907
Camp Clinton 1850
Camp Stuart Brown 1900
Camp Walter 1880
Campbell Alan Barnette 1919
Campbell Charles Soutter 1909
Campbell Gavin Elliott 1982
Campbell James 1849
Campbell James Alexander 1882
Campbell Kimberly C. 1981
Campbell Treat 1878
Campbell William Harvey Wilson 1856
Cangelosi Russell Joseph 1972
Capozzalo Douglas Daniel 1976
Capron Paul 1960
Capron Samuel Mills 1853
Carey John 1945W
Carlisle James Mandeville 1901
Carlsen Ray Allen 1957
Carlsson Mats Erik 1981
Carpenter George Boone 1902
Carpenter Robert John 1859
Carter Charles Francis 1878
Carter Edwin Osgood 1837
Carter Frederic Dewhurst 1919
Carter Lyon 1915
Carter Walter Frederick 1895
Case George Bowen 1894
Case, Jr. Philip Benham 1970
Caskey Taliaferro Franklin 1865
Casscells Christopher Dyson 1976
Cassel John A. 1958
Caukins, Jr. George Peck 1943
Caulkins John Erwin 1948
Cerveris Michael Ernest 1983
Chadwick George Brewster 1903
Chafee John Hubbard 1947
Chamberlain Daniel Henry 1862
Chamberlain Leander Trowbridge 1863
Chamberlain Robert Linton 1861
Chambers William Lyon 1843
Chandler William Henry 1839
Chapin Charles Frederick 1877
Charney Charles Meigs 1865
Chase Henry 1850
Chauvenet William 1840
Cheney Clifford Dudley 1898
Cheney Frank Dexter 1900
Cheney Howell 1892
Cheney Philip 1901
Cheney Ronald Lawton 1958
Cheney Russell 1904
Cheney Thomas Langdon 1901
Cheney Ward 1896
Cheney, Jr. Knight Dexter 1892
Chester Carl Thurston 1875
Chibundu Maxwell O. 1980
Child Linus Mason 1855
Childs Starling Winston 1976
Chimenti Norman Victor 1962
Chittenden George Hastings 1939
Choa Christopher James 1981
Chouteau Rene Auguste 1942
Christian Henry Hall 1901
Cirie John A. 1964
Clark Albert Barnes 1864
Clark Alexander Ray 1895
Clark Avery Artison 1909
Clark Charles Hopkins 1871
Clark Douglas Wells 1972
Clark Gerald Holland 1965
Clark Harold Terry 1903
Clark J. Bruce 1978
Clark Stephen Edward 1965
Clark Thomas W. 1961
Clark William Judkins 1948
Clark, Jr. R. Inslee 1957
Clarke Thomas Slidell 1875
Clarke William Barker 1849
Claude, Jr. Abram 1952
Clay Alexander Stephens 1964
Clay Cassius Marcellus 1918
Clay Green 1859
Clay Jesse Loring 1963
Clay Lowell Melcher 1939
Clay Timothy J. 1965
Clucas Lowell Melcher 1939
Cobb Henry Nitche 1855
Cochran Thomas 1904
Cochran Thomas 1894
Coe Edward Benton 1862
Coe Robert Elmer 1872
Coffin Edmund 1866
Coffin Henry Sloan 1897
Coffin James 1868
Coffin William Sloane 1949
Coffin, Jr. William Sloan 1949
Coffing Churchill 1834
Coggins Daniel Seton 1964
Cogswell John M. 1961
Cohen Kenneth Saul 1968
Cohen Robert Lewis 1974
Coit Joshua 1853
Coit William 1837
Coke, Jr. Henry C. 1926
Cole Hamilton 1866
Coleman John Caldwell 1881
Colgate Henry Auchincloss 1913
Collier Samuel (Sam) Carnes 1935
Collin Frederick 1871
Collin William Welch 1877
Colt LeBaron Bradford 1868
Colton Henry Martin 1848
Colton Willis Strong 1850
Condit Albert Pierson 1850
Condit Charles 1848
Condit Stephen 1856
Connelly, Jr. William James 1948
Connick Andrew Jackson 1952
Connick Louis 1945
Connor Lemuel Parker 1845
Connor William Gustine 1845
Connors David Michael 1974
Connors James Joseph 1959
Converse George Sherman 1850
Conway, Jr. Joseph Leo 1981
Cook Robert Johnston 1876
Cook II George 1945
Cook III George 1948
Cooke Eldridge Clinton 1877
Cooke Francis Judd 1933
Cooke James Barclay 1893
Cooke John Parick 1959
Cooke Robert Barbour 1936
Cooke Walter Evans 1895
Cooley Harlan Ward 1888
Coombs Orde Musgrave 1965
Coon John 1847
Cooper Carnell 1977
Cooper Henry Sage Fenimore 1917
Cooper Jacob 1852
Cooper John Sherman 1923
Cooper William Frierson 1838
Corbin William Herbert 1889
Corey Alan Lyle 1911
Corey III Alan Lyle 1965
Cornell Thomas Hilary 1915
Corning Erastus 1903
Cornish, Jr. Percy Gillette 1914
Cortelyou, Jr. George Bruce 1913
Corwin Robert Nelson 1887
Corwith John White 1890
Cosgrove Thomas Francis 1969
Costikyan Granger 1929
Cowdry Rex William 1968
Cowles Alfred 1913
Cowles Alfred 1886
Cowles William Hutchinson 1887
Cowles William Sheffield 1921
Cowles III Alfred 1913
Cox John Joughin 1891
Coxe Alexander Brown 1887
Coy Edward Harris 1910
Coy Sherman Lockwood 1901
Crampton Rufus Cowles 1851
Crane, Jr. Winthrop Murray 1904
Crapo Stanford Tappan 1886
Crapo William Wallace 1852
Crawley Brian Scott 1964
Cressler Alfred Miller 1902
Crile, Jr. George 1929
Crosby Albert Hastings 1922
Crosby Henry Stetson 1926
Crosby John 1890
Crosby, Jr. Benjamin Lewis 1892
Cross Alan W. 1966
Cross John Walter 1900
Cross Richard James 1937
Cross Walter Snell 1904
Cross William R. 1941
Cross William Redmond 1896
Croxton John Thomas 1857
Cruikshank, Jr. Paul Fessenden 1952
Crump John 1833
Csar Michael F. 1972
Cunningham Hugh Terry 1934
Cunningham Oliver Baty 1917
Curtin Francis Clare 1935
Curtis George Louis 1878
Cushing Charles Cyprian Strong 1902
Cushing William Lee 1872
Cushman Charles W. 1957
Cushman Isaac LaFayette 1845
Cushman, Jr. Lt. Gen. Robert E. 1958
Cutler Benjamin Crawford 1926
Cutler Carroll 1854
D'Avanzo Louis A. 1956
Daggett Oliver Ellsworth
Dahl George 1908
Dalby Michael Thomas 1966
Dale, Jr. Edwin Lyon 1945
Daly Frederick Joseph 1911
Dana William Buck 1851
Dana James Dwight
Daniels Forest Leonard 1907
Daniels John H. 1943
Daniels Joseph Leonard 1860
Daniels Rensselaer Wilkinson 1873
Daniels Thomas Leonard 1914
Danielson Richard Ely 1907
Darling Arthur Burr 1916
Darling Thomas 1836
Davenport Bradfute Warwick 1938
Davenport George Leovy 1980
Davenport John A. 1926
Davenport Russell Wheeler 1923
Davenport Stephen Rintoul 1915
Davies Philip Turner 1976
Davies Thomas Frederick 1853
Davies Thomas Frederick 1894
Davis Benjamin 1895
Davis Benjamin Franklin 1833
Davis Clinton Wildes 1911
Davis John 1835
Davis Lowndes Henry 1860
Davis Richard Marden 1933
Davis Robert Stewart 1860
Davis Walter Goodwin 1908
Davis II Horace Webber 1936
Davison Daniel Pomeroy 1949
Davison Endicott Peabody 1945
Davison Frederick Trubee 1918
Davison Harry Pomeroy 1920
Davison Henry Pomeroy 1920
Dawes Chester Mitchell 1876
Day Arthur Pomeroy 1890
Day Clive 1892
Day Dwight Huntington 1899
Day Huntington T. 1923
Day John Calvin 1857
Day Melville Cox 1862
Day Robert Webster 1875
Day Sherwood Sunderland 1911
Day Thomas Mills 1837
Day Thomas Mills 1886
Day William Edwards 1902
Day Henry N
Deans Robert Barr 1918
Dechert Henry Martyn 1850
Decker, Jr. Edmund Lockwood 1929
DeForest Stephen Elliott 1955
Demaree II Frank Edward 1969
Deming Charles Clerc 1872
Deming Henry Champion 1872
Deming Henry Champion 1836
Deming Lawrence Clerc 1883
Dempsey Andrew Squire 1956
Dempsey John Bourne 1911
Dempsey, Jr. James Howard 1938
Denegre Thomas Bayne 1915
DeNeufville John Phillip 1961
Denison Lindsay 1895
Dennis Frederic Shepard 1872
Denny Thomas 1854
Denslow Herbert McKenzie 1873
Dent Henry Hatch 1836
Depew Canson Goodyear 1919
Depew Chauncey Mitchell 1856
DeSa Pompeo Ascenco 1841
DeSibour Jules Henri 1896
DeSilver Albert 1910
Desjardins Peter Earl 1965
Devlin Michael William 1982
Devor, Jr Donald S. 1941
DeVore Mark Samuel 1980
Dexter Franklin Bowditch 1861
Dexter Morton 1867
Diamond Peter C. 1974
Dickinson Arthur 1856
Diller John Cabot 1924
Dilworth George Toby 1980
Dilworth Joseph Richardson 1938
Dimock Henry Farnam 1863
Dines Tyson 1908
Dixon Theodore Polehemus 1907
Dixon William Palmer 1868
Doane John Wesley 1891
Dodd Albert 1838
Dodge Francis Talmage 1904
Dodge Philip Lyndon 1907
Dodge Washington 1929
Dominick David DeWitt 1960
Dominick Gayer Gardner 1909
Donaldson William Henry 1953
Donnelley Gaylord 1931
Donnelley Reuben H. 1889
Donnelley Richard Robert 1889
Donnelley Thomas Elliott 1889
Doolittle Duncan Hunter 1943
Douglas Malcolm 1900
Douglass Willard Robinson 1887
Dousman Louis deVierville 1906
Dowling Brian J. 1969
Downing III Earl S. 1970
Doyle, Jr. Thomas James 1974
Drain Richard Dale 1943
Draper Arthur Joy 1937
Draper III William H. 1950
Dreisbach John Martin 1903
DuBois John Jay 1867
Dunham George Elliott 1859
Dunham, Jr. Lawrence Boardman 1938
Dunn George J. 1957
Dunning Rev. Albert Elijah 1867
Dunwody James Bulloch 1836
Durfee, Jr. C. Gibson 1956
Durham II Edwin A. 1953
Duryee Samuel Sloan 1917
Dutton Samuel W.S.
Dwight Timothy 1849
Dwight Winthrop Edwards 1893
Dyess Arthur Delma 1939
Eakin Emmet Alexander 1856
Eakin William Spencer 1846
Eames Benjamin Tucker 1843
Early Hobart Evans 1945
Eaton Samuel Lewis 1877
Eaton Sherburne Blake 1862
Ecklund John E. 1938
Eddy Maxon Hunter 1929
Eden John W. 1951
Edozien Anthony O. 1979
Edwards Alfred Lewis 1857
Edwards George Benjamin 1878
Edwards Newton 1842
Edwards Richard Henry 1901
Eels John Shepard 1901
Eichelberger Martin Smyser 1858
Eisenberg Bruce Alan 1974
Eisler Colin Tobias 1952
Ekfelt Richard (Dick) Henry 1971
Elder Samuel James 1873
Eldridge Charles St. John 1839
Elebash Shehand Daniel 1944
Elliot Henry Rutherford 1871
Elliot William Horace 1844
Ellis Garrison McClintock Noel 1951
Ellis Harland Montgomery 1930
Ellis Raymond Walleser 1930
Ellis, Jr. Alexander 1944
Ellis, Jr. F. Henry 1941
Ellis, Jr. G. Corson 1951
Ellsworth John Stoughton 1905
Elwell, Jr. Francis Bolton 1945
Ely Grosvenor 1906
Embersits John Frank 1958
Emerson Alfred 1834
Emerson Christy Payne 1953
Emerson Joseph 1841
Emerson Samuel 1848
English, Jr. William Deshay 1975
Eno John Chester 1869
Eno Wiliam Phelps 1882
Ercklentz Alexander Tonio 1959
Erickson Thomas Franklin 1940
Ernst Frederick Vincent 1960
Erskine, Jr. Albert DeW. 1930
Esselstyn Erik Canfield 1959
Esselstyn, Jr. Caldwell Blakesman 1956
Estill Joe Garner 1891
Esty Constantine Canaris 1845
Etra Donald 1968
Eustis William Tappan 1841
Evans Evan Wilhelm 1851
Evans Peter Seelye 1972
Evans T. Boyd 1954
Evarts Maxwell 1884
Evarts Sherman 1881
Evarts William Maxwell 1837
Ewell John Lewis 1865
Ewing Sherman 1924
Eyre Lawrence L. 1970
Farnam Charles Henry 1868
Farnam Henry Walcott 1874
Farnam John Dorrance 1890
Farnam William Whitman 1866
Farrar John Chipman 1918
Faulkner Endress 1839
Fearey Morton Lazell 1898
Fehr Gerald F. 1955
Feinerman James Vincent 1971
Felder John Henry 1844
Fenn William Henry 1854
Ferguson Alfred Ludlow 1902
Ferguson James Lord 1944
Ferguson, Jr. Alfred L. 1926
Ferry Orris Sanford 1844
Fetner Philip Jay 1965
FewSmith William 1844
Field David Irvine 1841
Field John Warner 1937
Finch Francis Miles 1849
Fincke Clarence Mann 1897
Finley John George Gilpin 1947
Finney C. Roger 1973
Finney Graham Stanley 1952
Finney John Warren 1945W
Fischer Louis Christopher 1856
Fish Stuyvesant 1905
Fisher Irving 1888
Fisher Samuel Herbert 1889
Fisher Scott B. 1972
Fisher George Park
Fishwick Dwight Brown 1928
Fisk Samuel Augustus 1844
Fisk Stuart Wilkins 1840
Fitch George Hopper 1932
Fitch James 1847
Flagg Wilbur Wells 1873
Flanders Henry Richmond 1885
Fleming Andrew T. 1980
Fleming William Stuart 1838
Fletcher Alexander Charles 1933
Flynn Alexander Rex 1906
Folsom Charles Seward 1883
Foote Charles Seward 1883
Foote Harry Ward 1866
Foote Joseph Forward 1850
Foote Thaddeus 1844
Ford George Tod 1865
Ford William 1942
Fore John Arthur 1979
Fort Donald Kenneth 1976
Fortgang Jeffrey 1971
Fortunato S. Joseph 1954
Foster David John 1967
Foster Dwight 1848
Foster Eleazar Kingsbury 1834
Foster George Forris 1879
Foster John Pierrepont 1869
Foster Joseph Taylor 1908
Foster Maxwell E. 1923
Foster Reginald 1884
Foster Roger 1878
Fowler Charles Newell 1876
Fowler Horace Webster 1863
Fowler William 1860
Fox Joseph Carrere 1938
Franchot Charles Pascal 1910
Francis Samuel Hopkins 1964
Frank Clinton E. 1938
Frank III Charles Augustus 1963
Frank, Jr. Victor H. 1950
Franklin Richard David 1983
Fredericks Joel Richard 1977
Freeman Henry Varnum 1869
French Asa Palmer 1882
French Robert Dudley 1910
Friedland Johnathan David 1970
Fritzche Peter B. 1957
Frost Elihu Brintnal 1883
Frost, Jr. Albert Carl 1922
Fuller Henry W. 1969
Fuller Philo Carroll 1881
Fuller Stanley Evert 1935
Fuller William Henry 1861
Fulton Robert Brank 1932
Furbish Edward Brown 1860
Gachel Charles Nicholas 1843
Gage Charles Stafford 1925
Gaillard Edward McCrady 1919
Gaillard, Jr. Samuel Gourdin 1916
Gaines Edwin Frank 1975
Gaines Milton J. 1956
Galbraith Evan Griffith 1950
Gale Frederick Scott 1983
Gallaudet Edson Fessenden 1893
Gallaudet Herbert Draper 1898
Gallico III G. Gregory 1968
Galvin Michael Gerard 1971
Gammell Arthur Amory 1911
Gardner Robert Abbe 1912
Garfield Newell 1918
Garnsey Walter Wood 1930
Garnsey William Herrick 1960
Garnsey William Smith 1933
Garnsey, Jr. Walter W. 1967
Garrison Elisha Ely 1897
Garvey John Joseph 1929
Gates Artemis L. 1918
Gates Edward Raymond 1976
Gerard Sumner 1897
Gibbs Josiah Willard
Gibson, Jr. Richard Channing 1976
Giegengack, Jr. Robert F. 1960
Gifford Richard C. 1954
Gile Clement D. 1939
Gile Clement Moses 1914
Gile Lawrence Maclester 1978
Gill B. 1936
Gill Brendan 1963
Gill Charles Otis 1889
Gill George Metcalf 1888
Gill Michael Gates 1963
Gillespie Kenrick S. 1929
Gillespie, Jr. S. Hazard 1932
Gillette Augustus Canfield 1841
Gillette Curtenius 1897
Gillette, Jr. Howard Frank 1964
Gilman Daniel Coit 1852
Gisen, Jr. Arthur R. 1954
Glaenzer Georges Brette 1907
Gleason William Henry 1853
Glover III Charles Carroll 1940
Goedecke William Skinner 1947
Goldberg Richard Julius 1977
Gonzalez Timoteo F. 1974
Goodenough John Bannister 1944
Goodyear Robert M. 1949
Gordon Alexander Blucher 1834
Gordon Edward McGuire 1938
Gordon George Arthur 1934
Gould Anthony 1877
Gould James 1918
Gould James Gardner 1845
Gow Robert Haigh 1955
Grammar Christopher 1843
Grandine Thomas Allan 1981
Granger Gideon 1843
Granger John Albert 1855
Grant Edward Dromgoole 1858
Graves Henry Solon 1892
Graves William Phillips 1891
Graves, Jr. Earl Gilbert 1984
Grayson James Gordon 1940
Grayson William Cabell 1944
Grayson, Jr. Cary Travers 1942
Grayson, Jr. William Cabell 1977
Gready William Postell 1842
Green Benjamin P. 1973
Green Charles Grady 1955
Green Edmund Frank 1880
Green Henry Sherwood 1879
Green James Payne 1857
Green Rudolph 1975
Greenberg Stephen David 1970
Greene Waldo Wittenmyer 1930
Greenway James Cowan 1900
Gregory Daniel Seelye
Griggs John Cornelius 1889
Griggs Maitland Fuller 1896
Griggs, Jr. Herbert Stanton 1928
Grimes David Charles 1948
Griswold Dwight Torrey 1908
Griswold William Edward Schenck 1899
Grove Manasses Jacob 1929
Grover Thomas Williams 1874
Growel Alfred 1853
Grubb Charles Ross 1873
Gruener Gustav 1884
Guernsey Raymond Gano 1902
Guidotti Hugh G. 1955
Guinzburg Thomas Henry 1950
Gulliver Henry Strong 1875
Gulliver William Curtis 1870
Guthrie Robert K. 1968
Gwin Samuel Lawrence 1930
Gwin, Jr. Samuel Lawrence 1963
Haas Frederick Peter 1935
Hadden Briton 1920
Hadley Arthur Twining 1876
Hadley Hamilton 1919
Hadley Morris 1916
Hadley James
Haffner, Jr. Charles C. 1919
Haight Ducald Cameron 1847
Haight George Winthrop 1928
Haight, Jr. Charles S. 1952
Haines Thomas Frederick David 1924
Haldeman Richard Jacobs 1851
Hale, Jr. Eugene 1898
Hall Daniel Emerson 1834
Hall Edward Tuck 1941
Hall Jesse Angell 1936
Hall John Loomer 1894
Hall John Manning 1866
Hall Robert A. 1930
Hall William Kittredge 1859
Hall, Jr. Frederick Bagry 1933

CLICK HERE FOR THE PDF