text:
Before TACHA and KELLY, Circuit Judges, and BROWN,** District Judge.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Plaintiff Harvey G. Wilson commenced a pro se action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.1983, seeking damages and equitable relief for alleged violations of his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights by Oklahoma prison officials. The state Department of Corrections prepared and filed a special report upon order of the district court, in accordance with Martinez v. Aaron, 570 F.2d 317 (10th Cir.1978)(the Martinez report). Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C.1915(d) as frivolous. Wilson responded to the motion. The district court granted defendants' motion to dismiss, and Wilson, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, now appeals.
This court has jurisdiction by virtue of 28 U.S.C. 1291, and our review of the district court's dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is de novo, applying the same standards as the district court. Ayala v. Joy Mfg. Co., 877 F.2d 846, 847 (10th Cir.1989). "We will uphold a dismissal [under Rule 12(b)(6) ] only when it appears that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the claims that would entitle the plaintiff to relief." Jacobs, Visconsi & Jacobs, Co. v. City of Lawrence, 927 F.2d 1111, 1115 (10th Cir.1991) (citing Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984)). In reviewing a decision to dismiss for failure to state a claim in a pro se case, "we must decide whether, liberally construing plaintiff['s] allegations, accepting them as true, but also viewing them within the context of the undisputed facts developed in the record, plaintiff[ ] can make any argument, based upon law or fact, in support of the claims asserted." Reed v. Dunham, 893 F.2d 285, 286 (10th Cir.1990)(citations omitted).
Similarly, dismissal of a complaint for frivolousness requires a determination that the complaint "lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). However, because a dismissal for frivolousness is discretionary with the district court, our review is for abuse of that discretion. Denton v. Hernandez, 112 S.Ct. 1728, 1734 (1992); Shabazz v. Askins, 980 F.2d 1333, 1333 (10th Cir.1992).
Wilson's claims arise from his being charged and found guilty of misconduct and his subsequent transfer from the Idabel Work Center to Howard McLeod Correctional Center (HMCC). Based on the report of a prison officer, Wilson was found guilty of battery following a misconduct hearing, and his subsequent appeals within the prison's disciplinary system were denied. We construe his pleadings liberally, as required by Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir.1991). Wilson alleged that he was denied due process because the disciplinary chairperson did not 1) set forth in detail the evidence relied on at the hearing, and 2) state why the reporting officer's statement was believed over Wilson's contentions of innocence. Wilson contended these failures are a violation of the prison's disciplinary procedure policy. Wilson also complained that, on appeal within the prison disciplinary system, defendants Ramsey and Moon similarly failed to provide detailed support for the guilty verdict. Wilson's second claim is that conditions at HMCC violate his Eighth Amendment right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment.
We affirm the district court's ruling, granting defendant's motion to dismiss, because we conclude that Wilson's complaint fails to state claims which rise to the level of constitutional deprivations. Wilson's allegations that defendants failed to provide detailed support for the guilty verdict on the battery charge do not state a claim of constitutional dimension, in light of the record in this case. Due process requirements are met in a prison disciplinary hearing if there is "some evidentiary basis" for the challenged ruling. Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455 (1985); Taylor v. Wallace, 931 F.2d 698, 701 (10th Cir.1991). Here, the Martinez report indicates that plaintiff was found guilty of battery based on the eyewitness account of a prison officer that plaintiff was purposefully bumping into people while at a Wal-Mart store during a canteen run. Prison disciplinary procedure may require more, but violation of that policy does not, by itself, result in a constitutional violation. The Martinez report contains an adequate evidentiary basis to support the ruling that plaintiff was guilty of battery. Therefore, this claim was properly dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6).2 Further, we agree with the district court that plaintiff has failed to state any other due process claims with respect to his misconduct hearing. See, e.g., Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974)(outlining due process requirements for prison disciplinary proceedings).
Wilson contends that certain prison conditions constitute Eighth Amendment violations. To state a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim, a plaintiff must allege serious deprivation or pain, and that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to plaintiff's needs. See Miller v. Glanz, 948 F.2d 1562, 1569-70 (10th Cir.1991)(citing Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976), and Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (1981)). Wilson's allegations in his original complaint, that the placement of his bed and overcrowded conditions violate the Eighth Amendment, do not rise to the level of claims of serious deprivation or pain. See Rhodes, 452 U.S. at 346-48. In his response to defendants' motion to dismiss, Wilson also alleged "unbearable pain" in his foot from an injury which he claims was caused by unsafe conditions. We must take that allegation as true. Nonetheless, Wilson's pleadings fail to allege facts that would support a finding of deliberate indifference in connection with his claim of pain. Therefore, Wilson's Eighth Amendment claim likewise fails.
The judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma is AFFIRMED.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


LIONS BUILDING CORPORATION and Myrtle J. Christie, Herman Jaksch d/b/a Lions Restaurant and Paul Koger, Defendants-Appellees.
Joseph M. Tobias, Norval A. Brown, Chicago, Ill., for appellant.
Paul H. Heineke, Paul E. Price, Robert L. Brody, Clarence R. Conklin, William H. Schrader, Louis F. Dennen, George J. Gore, Chicago, Ill. (Arthur J. Baer, Jr., Heineke, Conklin & Schrader, McKinley & Price, Chicago, Ill., of counsel), for appellees.
Before MAJOR, FINNEGAN and SWAIM, Circuit Judges.
This case presents for review a decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, which held that it did not have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332 of an action for damages based on a statute of the State of Illinois which the plaintiffs, citizens of Puerto Rico, filed against the defendants who are citizens of Illinois.
"(b) The word `States', as used in this section, includes the Territories and the District of Columbia."
The plaintiffs contend that Puerto Rico at the time this action was filed was, and still is, a Territory of the United States within the meaning of Section 1332(b), 28 U.S.C.A.
After various answers were filed the defendants filed a motion asking the trial court to dismiss the action upon its own motion for want of jurisdiction. In support of this motion the defendants alleged that in both the original complaint and in the amended complaint the plaintiffs had stated that they were citizens of the Territory of Puerto Rico; that "the former insular possession of Puerto Rico is not now, and was not on August 13, 1953, a Territory, but a Commonwealth `within our union with the United States'"; and that therefore "Section 1332, 28 U.S.C.A. does not confer jurisdiction upon the United States District Court of an action between a citizen of a state and a citizen of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico." In response to this motion the District Court dismissed this action, and thereafter denied the plaintiffs' motion to vacate the order of dismissal and to permit them to amend their complaint to show that they were citizens of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
"The policy of the statute conferring diversity jurisdiction upon the district courts calls for its strict construction. [Citations.] Accordingly, if a plaintiff's allegations of jurisdictional facts are challenged by the defendant, the plaintiff bears the burden of supporting the allegations by competent proof."
See also City of Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 314 U.S. 63, 62 S.Ct. 15, 86 L.Ed. 47; and Trust Co. of Chicago v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 7 Cir., 183 F. 2d 640, 642, 21 A.L.R.2d 238. However, strict construction does not require that a plaintiff who alleges facts bringing himself within the diversity section should be denied the privilege of maintaining his action in the federal courts without an opportunity to prove the facts necessary to sustain his allegations as to diversity.
The trial court in the instant case decided as a matter of law that a citizen of Puerto Rico was not a citizen of a "territory" and was, therefore, not entitled to bring an action under the diversity section of the Code against citizens of the State of Illinois. We think this decision was erroneous.
It seems clear to us that for many years prior to July 25, 1952, when the new constitution of Puerto Rico was declared to be in force, the island of Puerto Rico, the adjacent islands belonging to the United States and the waters of those islands, had been considered by the government and the courts as a Territory of the United States.
Puerto Rico was ceded to the United States by Spain under the Treaty of Paris in 1898, 30 Stat. 1755. For a short period of time it was under military government. By the Foraker Act, 31 Stat. 77, April 12, 1900, Congress established a temporary civil government for Puerto Rico to administer local affairs and to provide revenue. That Act provided for a bill of rights, for a territorial governor and other executive officers, and for a legislative department and a judicial department. Under the Foraker Act most of the officials for Puerto Rico were appointed by the President of the United States, with the advice and consent of the Senate, but the members of the House of Delegates, one of the two branches of the legislative assembly, were chosen by the qualified voters of Puerto Rico. The then inhabitants of Puerto Rico, with some exceptions, and their children born thereafter were declared to be citizens of Puerto Rico and entitled to the protection of the United States. Such inhabitants together with citizens of the United States residing in Puerto Rico were to constitute a body politic under the name "People of Puerto Rico." That Act provided that the laws and ordinances then in force in Puerto Rico should continue in force and effect except insofar as they were inconsistent with the applicable statutory laws of the United States and with the provisions of the Foraker Act or which were altered thereafter pursuant to the provisions of that Act.
Congress next turned its attention to the form of government for Puerto Rico in 1917. The Organic Act of 1917, 39 Stat. 951, c. 145, 48 U.S.C.A. § 731 et seq., sometimes referred to as the Jones Act, granted further local legislative powers to the government of Puerto Rico. This Act provided for the election by the qualified electors of Puerto Rico of a resident commissioner to the United States and provided that he should be entitled to receive official recognition by all departments of the United States. In the Organic Act all inhabitants of Puerto Rico, with certain minor exceptions, were declared to be citizens of the United States.
In 1947 Congress amended the Organic Act of Puerto Rico, 61 Stat. 770, 48 U.S. C.A. § 771 et seq., by providing for the election by the qualified voters of Puerto Rico of a governor, and for his impeachment and removal from office by the legislature of Puerto Rico. This 1947 Act also provided for the appointment by the governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate of Puerto Rico, of the heads of the executive departments of the government of Puerto Rico.
"It was clear that Puerto Rico qualified as a Territory for purposes of acts of Congress which included the Territories. [Citation of many decisions which so held.] The Island conformed to one of the commonly quoted definitions of a territory as a `portion of the country not included within the limits of any state, and not yet admitted as a state into the Union, but organized under the laws of Congress with a separate legislature, under a territorial governor and other officers appointed by the President and Senate of the United States.' [Citing authorities.]"
"Nevertheless, Puerto Rico was a territory, and unquestionably the provisions for diversity jurisdiction in Section 1332 were thought to include citizens of Puerto Rico."
However, in the trial court the defendants argued, and the court accepted their argument, that after the approval of the constitution for Puerto Rico and the change of the name to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico the island could no longer be considered a "territory" as the term is used in the diversity section of the Code.
The first act by Congress granting Puerto Rico the right to a constitutional government was Public Law 600, Ch. 446, Laws of the 81st Congress, 2nd Session, 64 Stat. 319, approved July 3, 1950. That Act stated: "fully recognizing the principle of government by consent, this Act is now adopted in the nature of a compact so that the people of Puerto Rico may organize a government pursuant to a constitution of their own adoption." 48 U.S.C.A. § 731b. It was provided that the Act should be submitted to the qualified voters of Puerto Rico for their acceptance or rejection; that if the Act was approved by a majority of the voters voting, the legislature of Puerto Rico was authorized to call a constitutional convention to draft a constitution for the island of Puerto Rico; and that the constitution should provide for a republican form of government and should include a bill of rights. After the adoption of the constitution by the people of Puerto Rico, the President of the United States was authorized to transmit the constitution to the Congress of the United States if he found that the constitution which was adopted conformed with the provisions of the Act and of the Constitution of the United States. Upon approval by the Congress the constitution of Puerto Rico was to become effective in accordance with its terms.
"We, the people of Puerto Rico, in order to organize ourselves politically on a fully democratic basis, to promote the general welfare, and to secure for ourselves and our posterity the complete enjoyment of human rights, placing our trust in Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the commonwealth which, in the exercise of our natural rights, we now create within our union with the United States of America." (Our emphasis.) 48 U.S.C.A. § 731d note.
It is true that the new constitution vested in the people of Puerto Rico broader local legislative powers than they had theretofore enjoyed but it seems clear that the change was not sufficient to make it necessary to hold that Puerto Rico was no longer a territory within the meaning of that word as used in Section 1332 of the Code.
We find in the House Report on this bill the same definite statements that the bill would not change Puerto Rico's fundamental political relationship to the United States. U. S. Code Congressional and Administrative Service, 1950, Volume 2, page 1894.
The above expressions all indicate that the persons interested in and responsible for the Act did not think that Puerto Rico was thereby being changed from a territory to some other political entity.
The mere change of the name of Puerto Rico to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico did not change Puerto Rico from a territory to a commonwealth unless its form of government was so changed as to actually make it a commonwealth.
The word commonwealth does not have a definite, single meaning. Webster's New International Dictionary 541 (2d ed. 1953) defines commonwealth as used in American History as: "Any of the individual States of the United States. Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Kentucky are officially called commonwealths." The same dictionary also gives the following broader definition of the term commonwealth: "The body of people constituting a state or politically organized community; a body politic; hence, a state, esp. one constituted by a number of persons united by compact or tacit agreement under one form of government and system of laws." This definition describes both a state of the United States and a territory such as Puerto Rico.
Puerto Rico both before and after the adoption and approval of its constitution was a territory of the United States within the meaning of the diversity section of the federal code of civil procedure.
The defendants finally contend that even if Puerto Rico is a territory within the meaning of Section 1332, the amendment to that Section to extend diversity to controversies between citizens of a state and citizens of a territory is unconstitutional as an extension of the judicial power of federal courts beyond the limits authorized by Article III, § 2, of the Constitution of the United States which provides that the judicial power shall extend to controversies "between citizens of different States."
"It is true, that as citizens of the United States, and of that particular district which is subject to the jurisdiction of congress, it is extraordinary, that the courts of the United States, which are open to aliens, and to citizens of every state in the union, should be closed upon them. But this is a subject for legislative, not for judicial consideration."
"In the case of Hepburn & Dundas v. Ellzey, this court determined, on mature consideration, that a citizen of the district of Columbia could not maintain a suit in the circuit court of the United States. That opinion is still retained."
"It has been attempted to distinguish a territory from the district of Columbia; but the court is of opinion, that this distinction cannot be maintained. They may differ in many respects, but neither of them is a state, in the sense in which that term is used in the constitution."
The Court held that Winter, being a citizen of the Mississippi Territory, was incapable of maintaining a suit alone in the District Court of Louisiana.
The question of the diversity clause being applicable to citizens of the District of Columbia did not again come before the Supreme Court until it considered the case of National Mutual Insurance Co. of Dist. of Col. v. Tidewater Transfer Co., 337 U.S. 582, 69 S.Ct. 1173, 93 L.Ed. 1556. There the federal District Court of Maryland held that it did not have jurisdiction of an action filed by a District of Columbia corporation where the jurisdiction depended solely on diversity of citizenship of the parties. The District Court for Maryland held that the diversity clause which had extended the jurisdiction to include citizens of the District of Columbia was unconstitutional and dismissed the complaint. The Court of Appeals, 4 Cir., 165 F.2d 531, affirmed and the Supreme Court granted certiorari. 333 U.S. 860, 68 S.Ct. 746, 92 L.Ed. 1139.
"In other words, cases between citizens of the District and those of the states were not included in the catalogue of controversies over which the Congress could give jurisdiction to the federal courts by virtue of Art. III."
"It is elementary that the exclusive responsibility of Congress for the welfare of the District includes both power and duty to provide its inhabitants and citizens with courts adequate to adjudge not only controversies among themselves but also their claims against, as well as suits brought by, citizens of the various states." 337 U.S. at page 590, 69 S.Ct. at page 1176.
In that opinion, 337 U.S. at page 590, 69 S.Ct. at page 1176, Mr. Justice Jackson refused to accept the argument that Congress may not combine the functions under Article I with those under Article III in the District Courts of the United States or the argument "that no jurisdiction other than specified in Art. III can be imposed on courts that exercise the judicial power of the United States thereunder", and "that Art. I powers over the District of Columbia must be exercised solely within that geographic area." The opinion, 337 U.S. at page 594, 69 S.Ct. at page 1177, also directs our attention to the fact that under the power given by Article I on the subject of bankruptcies Congress has further extended the power of Article III, and that this extension has been approved by the Court in many decisions.
"I cannot believe that the Framers intended to impose so purposeless and indefensible a discrimination, although they may have been guilty of understandable oversight in not providing explicitly against it. Despite its great age and subsequent acceptance, I think the Hepburn decision was ill-considered and wrongly decided. Nothing hangs on it now except the continuance or removal of a gross and wholly anomalous inequality applied against a substantial group of American citizens, not in relation to their substantive rights, but in respect to the forums available for their determination."
Mr. Justice Rutledge was of the opinion that the opinion by Mr. Justice Jackson actually overruled the Hepburn decision, and said that the Court should say so instead of trying to extend the legislative jurisdiction under Article I.
"It is Article III and nothing outside it that authorizes Congress to treat federal courts as `only another court of the State,' * * * and Article III allows it to do so only when the parties are citizens of different `States'." 337 U.S. at page 650, 69 S.Ct. at page 1197.
"But when the Constitution defined the ultimate limits of judicial power exercisable by courts which derive their sole authority from Article III, it is beyond the power of Congress to extend those limits."
Mr. Chief Justice Vinson wrote a separate dissenting opinion in which Mr. Justice Douglas joined. In his opinion the Chief Justice said that he agreed with the views expressed by Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Rutledge which related to the power of Congress under Article I of the Constitution to vest federal District Courts with jurisdiction of suits between citizens of states and the District of Columbia, and with the views of Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Jackson as to the proper interpretation of the word "states" as used in the diversity clause of Article III. In his opinion the Chief Justice, after reviewing the history of the adoption of the Constitution and its ratification by the states, said that those having most to do with the drafting and acceptance of the Constitution felt that the federal judicial power was restricted to those classes of cases set forth in Article III. Many decisions of the Supreme Court were cited to show that it had consistently held that Article III defined the limits beyond which Congress could not extend the diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts.
"The National Mutual case upheld the constitutionality of the Act involved here as applied to an action between a citizen of the District of Columbia and a citizen of a state. We think that decision is controlling where the action is between citizens of a state and a citizen of the Territory of Hawaii."
The Siegmund opinion pointed out, 175 F.2d at page 954, that the power of Congress to "make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory * * belonging to the United States" was expressly given by Article IV, § 3, Clause 2, of the Constitution. We think the Siegmund case was correctly decided and that the principles there announced apply also to the citizens of Puerto Rico.
The following District Court decisions also consider the National Mutual decision as holding that the extension of the diversity provision was constitutional: Greene v. Teffeteller, D.C.E.D.Tenn.N.D., 90 F.Supp. 387; and Menashe v. Sutton, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 90 F.Supp. 531.
"The reasons assigned by the two groups of Justices who concurred in the result [in the National Mutual case] are as applicable to cases involving citizens of territories as they are to cases in which citizens of the District of Columbia are parties."
We think that reasoning is equally applicable to citizens of Puerto Rico.
The judgment of the District Court dismissing this action is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion, including the reinstatement of the cause and the granting of the plaintiffs' motion to file within a reasonable time an amendment to their complaint alleging that at the time the original complaint herein was filed plaintiffs were citizens of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.


text:
Let families with children feel a warm welcome. Our interdisciplinary team develops and builds beautifully designed, high-quality game objects, play areas, and worlds of experiences that invite children to play and have fun.
From the idea to its implementation, we are at your side as a professional partner. Your wishes and goals as well as the local conditions form the basis of our carefully considered concept. We are committed to durable materials, high-quality workmanship, and tested safety.
Our creative team develops individual solutions for a variety of conditions and age groups. What they all have in common: they make children’s eyes light up. Whether hotel, retail, or company – together we make sure that children feel welcome and have fun.
Be inspired by the selection of beautifully designed, high-quality toys, play areas, and adventure worlds that we have realized in recent years for various business customers.
Choose one of the categories and discover our references in the relevant area.
It sets course for play corners in travel agencies and invites all little globetrotters on a journey of discovery. Surrounded by a carpet of waves and with a small island covered in palm trees in sight, the play ship makes even adults want to take to the sea. Everyone in the travel agency benefits from a lovingly furnished play area: children can play while they wait for their parents. Parents know that their little ones are kept busy and can therefore concentrate on the travel agent’s advice. Other customers enjoy a quiet and pleasant atmosphere. Satisfied customers are happy to come back.
Bringing the colors and activities of the mountain world indoors formed the basis for the concept at the Lürzerhof. The result was a clearly structured childcare room with different areas: the climbing frame, the playhouse, and the slide encourage role-playing and offer children a variety of inspirations for movement. The beanbags are perfect for chilling out and the tables invite children to play and do handicrafts. The play area combines ideas for children under 3 years of age with those for older children, and is guaranteed to put everyone in a good mood.
The four seasons tree forms the center of the concept, which the family hotel realized over an area of 550 m². It is 8.60 meters high and divides the room into four season areas, which offer children from 2 to 15 years of age a wide variety of play and exercise activities: in summer they can swing on the beach and balance over the summer meadow, in winter they can jump over ice floes and toboggan down a hill on a sledge with casters. The artistic design of the tree is reflected in the color scheme of the play options and visualizes the four seasons theme. Attractions at different heights such as the observation platform or the giant spiral tube slide alternate with climbing, seesawing, and hiding activities.
The HABA Family of Companies has its headquarters in Bad Rodach (Bavaria). Here and at other locations in Germany and abroad, over 2,000 employees work every day to meet the needs of the world’s nicest target group: children and families. Benefit from 80 years of experience in the development of carefully considered room concepts, innovative furniture, and educationally valuable toys.
Together with our interdisciplinary team, we develop creative, tailor-made concepts that invite children to play and stimulate their imagination. In doing so, we translate children’s needs into beautifully designed solutions and constantly come up with new ideas for the topic of playing. Our goal is to make the world more varied and nicer for children with age-appropriate toys.
The beautifully designed and carefully considered combination of your requirements and the needs of children is our strength. More than 60,000 products from the HABA Family of Companies form the tried-and-tested basis for your unique playing environment. Our interdisciplinary team takes up the style of your company and designs individual toys, play areas, and adventure worlds for you.
Whether toy, play area, or adventure world ... we develop solutions of all sizes with you. In the HABA Family of Companies we bundle a wealth of competences from different disciplines. What we offer: We give you expert support from the first idea to planning, from execution to installation.
Tested safety, durable materials, and high-quality workmanship are the central quality characteristics of our solutions. Constant product controls in our own and external testing laboratories are an integral part of our work. Our excellently trained team knows the relevant laws, standards, and regulations and can therefore guarantee compliance.
As a family company, we follow one basic principle: taking responsibility for tomorrow today. During production at our sites, we attach great importance to sustainability, environmental protection, and nature conservation. We process wood from sustainably managed forests and preserve energy and resources throughout the entire value chain by using efficient production processes.
We as a team are united by one passion: to awaken the enthusiasm, the spirit of discovery, and the curiosity of children. This motivates us to reinterpret the topic of playing in its various facets time and time again. Our goal is to combine the needs of children and families with the requirements of business customers in different industries, such as hotels, retail, or service companies. As part of the HABA Family of Companies, we stand for the values of quality, fairness, respect, change, responsibility, location, and returns.
Children are curious, creative, and imaginative. And they don’t play to learn, they learn automatically when they play. That’s why our concepts and solutions always focus on the fun of playing and the experience for children. Our toys stimulate the imagination, invite children to discover, and inspire age-appropriate ideas for playing. They offer children a variety of ideas for gathering experiences independently and having fun over and over again.
The desire to move is human nature, and children in particular like to let off steam. They love the tingling in their stomach that occurs when jumping, bouncing, balancing, and moving hand over hand. Our adventure worlds and play areas offer a wide variety of opportunities for children to play actively and to let off steam. The toys, which have been tested in practice and for safety, leave plenty of room for imaginative playing alone, in pairs, or in small groups.
Let’s make the world a little bit more family-friendly together. Based on your ideas, the local conditions, and the knowledge of what children want, we develop an exciting concept in close coordination with you. We accompany you from the first idea to its realization.
The Kindererlebniswelten team is looking forward to your inquiry.
I confirm that I have read, understood and accepted the privacy statement.
Kindererlebniswelten is part of the HABA Family of Companies.
We, Wehrfritz GmbH, August-Grosch-Str. 28-38, 96476 Bad Rodach (hereinafter Wehrfritz) are responsible for the processing of your data when you visit our website pursuant to Art. 4(7) EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
If you have any questions regarding data protection, please contact our Data Protection Officer by post: Wehrfritz GmbH, Data Protection, 96475 Bad Rodach or by e-mail: service(at)wehrfritz.de with the subject: Privacy.
Children’s data – Our websites are not directed at people under the age of 16 and we ask that people under the age of 16 do not provide us with any personal data whatsoever. Data must only be provided by or with the consent of the parent or guardian. If we learn that we have unlawfully collected personal data of a child under the age of 16, we will take steps to delete these data as quickly as possible.
II. What happens when I visit the Wehrfritz website?
IP address; date and time of the request; time zone difference; content of the request; access status/HTTP status code; amount of data transmitted in each case; website from which the request comes; browser; operating system and its interface; language and version of the browser software.
A cookie is a small data file that we transfer to your browser when you surf our site. A cookie can only contain information that we ourselves send to your end device – it cannot be used to read out private data. We do not have access to your personal information, but with the help of cookies we can identify your browser.
Your data collected in this way will be pseudonymized using technical precautions. Therefore, it is no longer possible to assign the data to you as a user. The data will not be stored together with other personal data of the user.
So that we recognize you on future visits, in order to display your desired settings in the shopping cart (language, country of delivery, user name).
So that you can use other specific services: e.g. displaying the site in your language, personalizing our site, etc.
So that we can tailor our site to the needs of our customers even more effectively.
Most browsers accept cookies by default. The help feature in the menu bar of most Internet browsers explains how to prevent your browser from accepting new cookies, how to have your browser notify you when you receive a new cookie, or how to disable all cookies received. If you disable cookies, certain features on our site may not be available to you and some websites may not be displayed correctly. The websites youronlinechoices.com and meine-cookies.org provide information about usage-based and behavior-based online advertising and how you can avoid them.
When you visit our website, we carry out analyses, e.g. to find out which information is most in demand or how you accessed our website. The analysis tools require the determination of individual visitors to be able to evaluate individual behavior. Personal identification, however, is generally not necessary, as only statistical data are to be generated. It is therefore customary, also due to the method applied by the supervisory authority, for IP addresses to only be collected in a shortened form.
The legal basis for processing this analytical data is our legitimate interest in how our customers interact with our website so that we can optimize the user experience and the features of our website, Art. 6(1) Clause 1 f).
The aim of online advertising is to design ads that are as individual as possible based on your interests. Technically, online tracking is usually carried out using advertising IDs in which user profiles are created via cookies by the providers of advertising networks and the advertisements are placed when a website is accessed on the basis of the cookie profile. By using tracking pixels on our website, when a user visits our website cookies are stored on the user’s end devices by the advertising partners. This enables us to send the user interesting offers even outside our website.
The information generated by the cookie about your use of our website (including your IP address in anonymous form) is transmitted to a Google server in the USA and stored there. Google will use this information to evaluate your use of the website, compile reports on website activity for us as the website operator, and provide other services related to the use of the website and the Internet. In addition, Google may also share this information with third parties to the extent that this is required by law or to the extent that third parties process these data on behalf of Google. Google will under no circumstances associate your IP address with any other data held by Google. By using this website, you consent to the processing by Google of data compiled about you in the manner described above and for the above-stated purpose. The collection and storage of data can be objected to at any time with effect for the future.
Furthermore, you can prevent the recording of the data created by the cookie and related to your use of the website (including your IP address) as well as the processing of these data by Google by downloading and installing the browser plugin available at the following link: http://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout?hl=de.
Alternatively to the browser add-on or within browsers on mobile devices, please click on this link, to prevent Google Analytics from collecting data within this website in the future (the opt-out only works in the browser and only for this domain). An opt-out cookie is stored on your device. If you delete your cookies in this browser, you must click on this link again.
Our website uses “social plugins”. This is currently the plugin of the service Facebook. You can recognize the provider of plugins by the marking on the box above its initial or the logo. We offer you the chance to communicate directly with the provider of the plugin via the button. Only if you click on the marked field and thereby activate it will the plugin provider be informed that you have accessed our website. This plugin may be used to send information, which may include personal data, to the service provider, who may use these data. Our website prevents the unknowing and unintentional collection and transmission of data to the service provider by means of a “2-click solution”. To activate a desired plugin, it must first be activated by clicking on the corresponding button. Only this activation of the plugin triggers the collection of information and its transmission to the service provider. Our website itself does not collect any personal data by means of social plugins or about their use.
Our website has no influence on which data an activated plugin collects and how they are used by the provider.
If you do not want social networks to collect data about you via our website, you must log out of the social networks before visiting our website.
Facebook Inc., 1601 S California Ave, Palo Alto, California 94304, USA; http://www.facebook.com/policy.php; further information about data collection: http://www.facebook.com/help/186325668085084, http://www.facebook.com/about/... and http://www.facebook.com/about/privacy/your-info#everyoneinfo. Facebook is subject to the EU-US Privacy Shield, https://www.privacyshield.gov/EU-US-Framework.
Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheater Parkway, Mountainview, California 94043, USA; https://www.google.com/policies/privacy/partners/?hl=de. Google is subject to the EU-US Privacy Shield, https://www.privacyshield.gov/EU-US-Framework.
Our websites also contain AddThis plugins. These plugins allow you to bookmark or share interesting content with other users. Through the plugins we offer you the chance to interact with social networks and other users, so that we can improve our website and make it more interesting for you as a user. The legal basis for the use of plugins is Art. 6(1) Clause 1 f) GDPR.
Via these plugins, your Internet browser establishes a direct connection to the AddThis servers and, if applicable, the selected social network or bookmarking service. The recipients are informed that you have accessed our website and receive the data mentioned under item IV. of this Policy. This information is processed on AddThis servers in the USA. When you send content on our website to social networks or bookmarking services, a link can be established between the visit to our website and your user profile on the relevant network. We have no influence on the data collected and data processing operations, nor are we aware of the full extent of data collection, the purposes of processing, or the storage periods. We also have no information about the deletion of the data collected by the plugin provider.
The plugin provider stores these data as usage profiles and uses them for purposes of advertising, market research, and/or demand-oriented design of its website. Such analysis takes place in particular (even for users who are not logged in) to provide demand-oriented advertising and to inform other users of the social network about your activities on our website. You have the right to object to the creation of these user profiles, whereby you must contact the plugin provider to exercise this right.
If you do not wish to participate in this process, you can object to the collection and storage of data at any time by setting an opt-out cookie with effect for the future: http://www.addthis.com/privacy/opt-out. Alternatively, you can adjust your browser to prevent the setting of a cookie.
For more information about the purpose and scope of data collection and processing by the plugin provider, and to learn more about your rights and setting options for the protection of your privacy, please contact: AddThis LLC, 1595 Spring Hill Road, Sweet 300, Vienna, VA 22182, USA, www.addthis.com/privacy.
We have integrated YouTube videos into our website, which are stored on http://www.YouTube.com and can be played directly from our website. These are all integrated into the “extended privacy mode”, which means that no data about you as a user will be transmitted to YouTube if you do not play the videos. Only when you play the videos will the data listed below be transmitted. We have no influence on this data transmission.
YouTube you must log out before activating the button. YouTube stores your data as user profiles and uses them for purposes of advertising, market research, and/or demand-oriented design of its website. Such analysis takes place in particular (even for users who are not logged in) to provide demand-oriented advertising and to inform other users of the social network about your activities on our website. You have the right to object to the creation of these user profiles, whereby you must contact YouTube to exercise this right.
VI. Which categories of recipients do we share your data with?
Within the scope of Art. 6(1) f) GDPR, we enable carefully selected mail order companies, brand manufacturers, publishers, and our affiliated companies to send you information and offers in the context of advertising. Data are only passed on for external marketing purposes if this is legally permitted. If you do not want this, you can object to the use of your data for advertising purposes at any time.
In all other cases, we will inform you when personal information is passed on to third parties.
To prevent the loss or misuse of data stored by us, we take extensive technical and operational security precautions which are regularly reviewed and adapted to technological advancements. We use SSL (RSA 1024 Bit) as an encryption and security software. This procedure is successfully used throughout the World Wide Web. You can tell that you are in the secure area when you see an icon (closed padlock) in the lower window bar of your browser.
All your personal data (name, address, credit card number, bank code, account number, etc.) are encrypted and transmitted securely over the Internet.
Only our Wehrfritz server can decrypt your data again. Unauthorized persons cannot read your information during transmission!
However, it is also your responsibility to protect the data you provide against misuse by encryption or other measures.
VIII. How long do we store your data for?
We will make your personal data anonymous and/or delete them as soon as they are no longer required for the above-mentioned purposes and insofar as we are not legally obliged to store them further (e.g. pursuant to the German Commercial Code Handelsgesetzbuch), Fiscal Code (Abgabenordnung)).
IX. What rights do you have?
The GDPR governs the rights of the “data subject”, primarily in Articles 15–22 GDPR. According to these, you have the right to information at any time about the data stored relating to you, its origin, and recipient as well as the purpose of storage. In addition, you have the right, under certain conditions, to request the deletion of your data and a restriction of the processing, correction of your data, and transmission of your data in a common machine-readable format. In addition to this is information about the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling, pursuant to Art. 22(1) and (4) GDPR and – at least in these cases – meaningful information about the logic involved as well as the significance and envisaged consequences of such processing for you.
Please address your request to service(at)wehrfritz.de or by post to Wehrfritz GmbH, Data Protection, 96475 Bad Rodach.
If you have given your consent to the processing of your data, you may withdraw this at any time. Such a withdrawal influences the permissibility of processing your personal data after you have given it to us.
To the extent that we base the processing of your personal data on the weighing of interests pursuant to Art. 6(1) Clause 1 f) GDPR, you may lodge an objection to the processing. This is the case if the processing is not necessary to fulfill a contract with you. When exercising such an objection, we ask you to explain the reasons why we should not process your personal data as we have done. In the event of a justified objection, we will examine the situation and either cease or adapt data processing, or we will point out to you our compelling legitimate reasons, on the basis of which we will continue processing.
Of course, you may object to the processing of your personal data for purposes of advertising and data analysis at any time. Please address your advertising objection to service(at)wehrfritz.de or by post to Wehrfritz GmbH, Data Protection, 96475 Bad Rodach.
X. Which complaints authority can you contact?
If you wish to lodge a complaint, you can use the supervisory authority’s online complaints form (available at: https://www.lda.bayern.de/de/beschwerde.html).
Wehrfritz GmbH is a part of the HABA Family of Companies.
To improve readability, we have dispensed with gender-specific differentiation in some cases. Terms apply to both genders for the purpose of equal treatment.
If links to external websites are used, we accept no responsibility for their content. The entire design including the texts, graphics, and the selection and arrangement of the same is protected by copyright.
Your message was sent. We will get back to you shortly!
Please fill in all fields and accept the Privacy Statement.

matches:
Art. 4
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 22
Art. 6


text:
The A.R.E. Headquarters in Virginia Beach, by the Year 2025?
What's Your Perspective? The answer to the question in the subtitle just above depends on one's perspective. From the perspective of science - one that involves a world shaped by familiar geophysical processes - we can predict rather closely just how much higher sea level will be in 2025. But from the standpoint of Cayce's catastrophic Earth change readings - which indicate that pole shift is in the immediate offing - it's probable that sea level will be falling off Virginia Beachbefore 2025. At least that would be the case according to THC's interpretations.
We'll begin our analysis with the first perspective, and show how geoscientists predict future sea-level elevations for coastal sites. The entry point to our deliberations will be a snippet from the University of Colorado press release for March 20, 2002, which has caused such a stir. The press release deals with the sudden breakup of an Antarctic ice shelf referred to as Larsen B.
Fig. 1 - Ice shelves of the Antarctic Peninsula.
“Ice shelves are thick plates of ice, fed by glaciers, that float on the ocean around much of Antarctica. The Larsen B [ice shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula] was about 220 meters [720 ft.] thick. Based on studies of shelf ice flow and sediment thickness beneath the ice shelf, the Larsen B is thought to have existed for at least 400 years prior to current events.
“The breakup of peninsular ice shelves has little direct consequence for sea-level rise. However the shelves act as buttresses, or braking systems, for glaciers on the continent.
To estimate the rise of the mean water level of the Atlantic Ocean relative to the A.R.E. Headquarters site over a given time interval requires developing credible information for the following three components of relative sea-level rise (RSLR).
the rate and direction of vertical movement of the Earth's crust underlying the A.R.E. Headquarters site.
These data can be combined to provide an estimate of relative sea-level rise over a specific time interval. One assumes here that a 20-25 year period reasonably describes the effective life of any coastal remedial measures, like sea walls, that might be used to protect coastal buildings. Also, before proceeding, note that relative sea-level rise (RSLR) varies from place to place, including as it does a site-specific value for crustal elevation changes. Values for the three components of RSLR mentioned above are estimated in the sections below.
changes in the volume of the ocean water molecules, due to warming. This thermal expansion component is estimated to contribute 0.6 mm/yr to global sea-level rise (SLR).
The specific effects of a, b, and c on global sea-level change are difficult to isolate.
Scientists have resorted to measuring the combined effect of the three main factors by analyzing a globally-distributed data base of 40 tide-gage records. Certain of these 40 records must be corrected for ongoing vertical crustal movements peculiar to their locations. For example, those tide gages on the U. S. east coast that are part of the 40-station network must be corrected1 for glacial-isostatic rebound (GIA). The GIA-correction process was alluded to in a 1996 article2 in the Virginian-Pilot, subtitled, "Scientists say that the mid-Atlantic coast is sinking into the ocean, with the Chesapeake Bay region going down 1-inch every 8 years." We will return to this subject later.
A careful analysis3 of global sea-level rise has settled on a value of 1.5 ± 0.3 mm/yr. This estimate is based on GIA corrections in the rate of sea-level rise found in certain of the records of the 40-tide-gage data base used for determining global sea-level rise. A few of these GIA-corrected records are from the Chesapeake Bay area.
Fig. 2 - Features of Antarctica referred to in this report.
Recent atmospheric warming has resulted in the retreat of ice shelves, like the Larsen, Müller, Jones, and Wordie ice shelves (see Fig. 1) on the Antarctic Peninsula.6 (Visit the National Snow & Ice Data Center for the latest information). These ice losses, however, are not an immediate threat to coastal communities like Virginia Beach because of global sea-level rise due to their melting. The disintegration of the northern Larsen Ice Shelf (Larsen A) "did not directly influence sea level, as the ice was already floating."7 So also with the most recent disintegration of Larsen B.
As for the Filchner-Ronnie and Ross ice shelves (Fig. 1), which may be stabilizing the vast West Antarctic Ice Sheet, these are not immediately threatened by the regional climate-warming mechanism that is destroying the ice shelves on the Antarctic Peninsula. Further warming of 10°C will be required before the -5°C mean annual isotherm -- which controls ice shelf disintegration -- will reach these ice-shelf fronts.6 This will by all accounts take several decades, at present rates of climate warming.
Finally, in 1995, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed a comprehensive report entitled "The Probability of Sea Level Rise," in which the effects of projected global warming on sea-level rise are considered.8 The EPA authors used a number of models to arrive at their global sea-level rise projections. Theirs is a very comprehensive scientific analysis. It includes a final chapter entitled, "How to use the results to project local sea level." Table 9-1 of the EPA report is reproduced immediately below. For the Virginia Beach situation that we have chosen to address -- the amount of RSLR 23 years from now -- we will go to the column headed 2025 (A.D.) and choose the value for the 50 per cent cumulative probability, or 5 cm. This is the amount of sea-level rise, to occur some 35 years from 1990, that can be attributed to climate induced acceleration in sea-level rise. The 50% probability value of 5 cm is to be added to the global sea-level rise estimate of 1.5 ± 0.3 mm/yr, mentioned earlier.
NOTE: To estimate sea level at a particular location, add these estimates to the rise that would occur if current trends were to continue. For example, if sea level is currently rising 3 mm/yr, then under current trends, sea level will rise 26 cm between 1990 and 2075. Adding 26 cm to the normalized values in the Table, the median estimate for 2075 is 43 cm, with a 1 percent chance of an 83 cm rise.
At present, some geoscientists are waving their hands about the recent rapid warming of the climate on the Antarctic Peninsula, saying that the melting there is unprecedented and bound to cause rapidly accelerating melting in the near future. They seem oblivious to the fact that there was a similar warming of the global climate in the Medieval warm period, which almost certainly affected Antarctica as well. Paul Recer, of The Associated Press (3/21/2002) reports that, “An unusually warm period a millennium ago may have been part of a natural planetary cycle, researchers say in a study of tree rings that scrutinizes the link between human activity and climate change. The study, appearing Friday in the journal Science, analyzed ancient tree rings from 14 sites on three continents in the northern hemisphere and concluded that temperatures in an era known as the Medieval Warm Period some 800 to 1,000 years ago closely matched the warming trend of the 20th century.
“In recent years, many climate scientists have said an unprecedented warming spell that began last century and continues is caused by the Greenhouse effect. The Greenhouse effect is blamed on an increase in the atmosphere of gases, principally carbon dioxide, from the burning of fossil fuels, which trap heat just as do glass panes in a greenhouse.
“The tree-ring study gives another perspective on Earth's natural cycles, said Edward Cook of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y. Cook is co-author of the study with Jan Esper and Fritz Schweingruber of the Swiss Federal Research Institute.
“Cook said the study shows the Earth to be 'capable of rapid changes and long periods of above average warmth on its own without greenhouse warming.
Cook said the study found that, based on the growth of rings in the trunks of trees that lived hundreds of years ago, the temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period were about equal to the warming trend that started in the 20th century.
The latest work on vertical crustal motion in the vicinity of the A.R.E. Headquarters is a 28-year-old study by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) S.R. Holdahl and N.L. Morrison.9 These investigators studied a) elevation changes of bench marks along re-leveled geodetic survey lines, and b) mean-water-level changes at tide gages in the Chesapeake Bay area.
As shown in Figure 3, the NOAA authors estimated that the rate of elevation change, due to crustal motion at the Headquarters site amounts to a negative 2.0 mm/yr. Their computational procedure involved a correction for global sea-level rise amounting to +1.0 mm/yr. (This is close enough to the 1.5 ± 0.3 mm/yr [reference 3] that we are using to allow us to assume that the -2.0 mm/yr due to crustal movement is suitable to use for the Headquarters site).
Relative sea-level rise between 1990 and 2025 may be assumed to be equal to the rate of global sea-level rise plus the rate of rise due to the slow subsidence of the crust beneath the Headquarters site plus EPA's global sea-level-rise acceleration factor. (We will use a conservative, high-end estimate of 1.53 mm/yr for ongoing global sea-level rise.) This estimated value seems appropriate in view of the very latest estimate of Douglas and Peltier10 who say that their best estimate of the rate of global sea-level rise for the past century is closer to 2 mm/yr than to 1 mm/yr.
But, since we are now about one-third of the way from 1990 to 2025, we can take roughly 2.05 inches off the 6.85 inches estimated for the entire 1990-2025 period. Thus, in 2025, we predict that sea level will be about 4.8 inches higher than now in the vicinity of A.R.E. Headquarters. Not much to worry about, even if our estimate is off by 50 percent.
As mentioned above, the EPA table indicates that the value of 5.0 cm that we have used for climatic acceleration of sea-level rise 35 years out has a 50 per cent probability of occurring. Because we have no data to help us estimate any acceleration or deceleration of crustal subsidence at the Headquarters site, we will assume that it will be a constant negative 2.0 mm/yr (positive 2.0 mm/yr in mean water level rise) over the 35-year period. Thus, by the year 2025, there is an even chance that the mean water level along the shore in the vicinity of the A.R.E. Headquarters may be expected to be almost five inches higher than it is today.
I've been asked to speculate on possible "far-out" geophysical events that might disrupt the standard, science-based prognostications given for the magnitude and direction of sea-level rise over the next 23 years. One such speculation that comes to mind has to do with sub-glacial volcanism in Antarctica. Such a speculation would find support in the statement in 3976-15 that goes: "There will be the upheavals in the arctic and in the antarctic...." Active volcanism has recently been documented beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet, landward of the Ross Ice (Fig. 2) shelf in a "region thought to contain the inland edge of hot, actively extending lithosphere" (Blakenship, et al., 1993, Nature, v. 361, 11 Feb., p. 526.) If this volcanism suddenly were to increase, the result could be catastrophic melting of basal ice and surging of a large portion of the West Antarctic ice sheet into the sea. Melting of that ice would cause a large rise (several feet or more) in global sea level.
The other eventuality that comes to mind has to do with a sudden vertical acceleration in some of the earth's crustal plates due to mantle motions in the earth's interior. Such events could cause changes in the capacities of the ocean basins that would have a considerable effect on global sea level. There is at present no rational way to estimate such an event.
Since we have developed a calibrated model to depict land-sea boundaries immediately after a one-degree shift to 89.0°N and 60.0°W, let's look at the model output for the region offshore of Virginia Beach. In Figure 4 we see that the shore has moved out beyond the edge of the continental shelf and part way down the continental slope.
Fig. 4 - Model output for the approximate position of the land-sea boundary in the Virginia Beach region immediately after a one-degree shift of the north pole to 89.0°N, 60.0°W. Each square is roughly five nautical miles on a side. The predicted land-sea boundary occurs between the green and blue colored areas.
It's startling to consider that the world's greatest naval base, together with the Hampton Roads harbors and all of the other harbors of the Chesapeake Bay could suddenly be cut off by a small pole shift. But we must remember that reading 3976-15 states that “land will appear off the east coast of America.” If not off Virginia Beach, then where?
We think our modeling effort is on the right track as far as the Cayce pole-shift and Earth-changes readings are concerned. This is because we have calibrated our 1° pole-shift model to reproduce simultaneously almost all of the new land-sea relationships predicted in those readings. But regardless of what actually does unfold, we who live in the Virginia Beach area have these readings to contemplate.
Q. Is Virginia Beach to be safe?
A. It is the center - and the only seaport and center - of the White Brotherhood.... [and] .... the area where the entity is now located [Virginia Beach] will be among the safety lands, as will be portions of what is now Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, and much of the southern portion of Canada and the eastern portion of Canada; while the western lands, much of that is to be disturbed - in this land [America] - as, or course, much in other lands.
What is The White Brotherhood?
Q. Were the Essenes called at various times and places Nazarites, School of the Prophets, Hasidees, Therapeutae, Nazarenes, and were they a branch of the Great White Brotherhood, starting in Egypt and taking as members Gentiles and Jews alike?
A. In general, yes. Specifically, not altogether. They were known at times as some of these; or the Nazarites were a branch or a THOUGHT of same, see? Just as in the present one would say that any denomination by name is a branch of the Christian-Protestant faith, see? So were those of the various groups, though their purpose was of the first foundations of the prophets as established, or as understood from the school of prophets, by Elijah; and propagated and studied through the things begun by Samuel. The movement was NOT an Egyptian one, though ADOPTED by those in another period - or an earlier period - and made a part of the whole movement. They took Jews and Gentiles alike as members, - yes.
Q. To what extent are the Masters of the Great White Brotherhood directing the activities of Edgar Cayce? Who are the Masters directly in charge?
A. MESSENGERS from the higher forces that may manifest from the Throne of Grace itself.
A. (interrupting) Those that are directed by the Lord of lords, the King of kings, Him that came that ye might be one with the Father.
Q. Is Saint Germain among them? Who is Halaliel?
Q. Please give us Thine Identity?
A. He that seeks that has not gained control seeks damnation to his own soul! Control thine inner self that YE may KNOW the true life and light! For he that would name the Name must have become perfect in himself!
Q. If Mr. Cayce is a member and a messenger of the Great White Brotherhood, how do the Masters wish him to proceed and should not his activities henceforth be presented as Their Work?
A. As the work of the MASTER of masters, that may be presented when in those lines, those accords necessary through the White Brotherhood. This - this - THIS, my friends, even but LIMITS; while in Him is the Whole. Would thou make of thyself, of thyselves, a limited means of activity? Would thou seek to be hindered by those things that have made of many contending forces that continue to war one with another even in the air, even in the elemental forces? For He, thy Lord, thy God, hath called thee by name, even as He has given, "Whosoever will drink the cup, even as of my blood, he may indeed be free." While ye labor, let HIM that is the author, that is the finisher, that IS the Life, that is the bread of life, that is the blood of life, let HIM alone be thy guide! Dost He call any soul into service, THEN by name will He - does He - designate, and to whom it becomes a charge to keep - even as he has walked with Him, this body that ye use as a channel of approach to the Throne; ye make of same oft as a laughingstock to thy very soul through thine own selfishness! Let the light of Him, thy Christ, thy God, IN, that it may cleanse thy body, that it may lighten thy soul, that it may purge thy mind, that ye will only be just gentle, just kind; not find fault with any, for with faults ye build BARRIERS to thine own soul's enlightenment. "I, thy God, thy Christ, beseech thee!"
In the reading above, the Halaliel mentioned is the same archangel who spoke through Cayce during reading 3976-15, on January 19, 1934, saying, “Land will appear off the east coast of America.” And with respect to Virginia Beach being “the only seaport and center” of the White Brotherhood,one possible interpretation is that there may be other centers. One could be the Ascended Master Teaching Foundation at Mount Shasta, CA 96067., founded by Guy W. Ballard, mentioned in 254-83 above. Reading 957-1 may be supportive of this speculation.
Q. What organizations, or what channels should I use to do my cosmic work; and to give out the Spiritual light that can be reflected through me?
A. Through that of the [White?] brotherhood as is established in the mount (for the entity has approach to the Holy Mount) [Mount Shasta?-Hutton's speculation]; also among those associated in the school [Atlantic University?], wherein the expressions were given, "That Man May Make Manifest HIS Love For God And Man."
At this point in trying to understand what reading 1152-11 means relative to the White Brotherhood, I contacted one of THC's subscribers who has studied the works of the I AM movement for several years. This movement speaks often of the Great White Brotherhood. I asked him what he thought about reading 957-1, with special reference to the “the mount.” Might it refer to Mount Shasta? His answer seems somewhat more satisfactory than my speculation. See if you don't agree.
Remember the pattern in the mount, in self, in the physical body, in the mental body, in the spiritual body. THAT is the mount! So long as there is perfect coordination in the mount, all things work together for the GOOD of the mount.
When there is the rebellion in the mount, then there is disconnection, destruction, disconcerted effort, and the coordination - the cooperation of activity - is made awry.
Hence death in the physical ensues, by the disintegration.
“I believe that reading 957-1 is telling Mr. 957 to use the approach of The Great White Brotherhood to master self; that is, to develop the self through that which the Great White Brotherhood Teaches and works. That teaching is to yield to the Almighty and let the God self within take the bodies of oneself under control until the individual is a replica of God walking on the Earth. The Earth was created to be a school for teaching souls certain aspects of Self-growth. After the "Fall of Man" the Earth became corrupted from its purpose but, using the methods taught by the Great White Brotherhood, it provides the way home. In this way, men and women may make manifest HIS love for God and mankind.
[Note: One can find out more about The Great White Brotherhood by writing to The Ascended Master Teaching Foundation, P.O. Box 466, Mount Shasta, CA 96067].
Mitrovica, J.X., and J. L. Davis, 1995, Present-day post-glacial sea level change far from the Late Pleistocene ice sheets: Implications for recent analyses of tide gauge records, Geophys. Res. Letters, v. 22, no. 18, p. 2259-2532, Sept. 15.
Virginian Pilot, January 25, 1996.
J. L. Davis and J. X. Mitrovica, 1996, Glacial isostatic adjustment and the anomalous tide gauge record of eastern North America, Nature, v. 379, January 25, p. 331-333.
Bromwich D., 1995, Ice sheets and sea level, Nature, v. 373, January 5, p. 18-19.
Warrick, R., and J. Oerlemans, 1990, Climate change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment, p. 257-281, Cambridge Univ. Press.
Vaughan, D. G., and C.S.M. Doake, 1996, Recent atmospheric warming and retreat of ice shelves on the Antarctic Peninsula, Nature, v. 379, Jan. 25, p. 328-330.
Fahnestock, M., 1996, An ice shelf breakup, Science, v. 271, p 775-776.
Titus, J. G., and V. K. Narayanan, 1995, The probability of sea level rise, U.S. Env. Protect. Agency Rept. 230-R-95-008, Oct., 186 p.
Holdahl, S. R., and N. L. Morrison, 1974, Regional investigations of vertical crustal movements in the U. S., using precise relevelings and mareograph data, Tectonophysics, v. 23, p. 373-390.
Douglas, B. C., and W. R. Peltier, 2002, The puzzle of global sea-level rise: Physics Today, March 2002, p. 35-40.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. V. v.