text:
Internalized oppression

In social justice theory, internalized oppression is a recognized understanding in which an oppressed group accepts the methods and incorporates the oppressive message of the oppressing group against their own best interest. Rosenwasser (2002) defines it as believing, adopting, accepting, and incorporating the negative beliefs provided by the oppressor as the truth.

It occurs as a part of socialisation in an oppressive environment. Members of marginalized groups assimilate the oppressive view of their own group and consequently affirm negative self-stereotypes. This creates a detrimental impact on their psychosocial well-being and self-systems, causing them to produce and reproduce stress-induced, disadvantageous behavioral responses that lead to the formation of maladaptive habits. As a result, they cultivate and perpetuate an "assaulted sense of self" by not intentionally and deliberately engaging in active responsibility for their own well-being. Furthermore, the absence of proactive engagement as catalysts for change, such as fostering counterspaces and practicing active citizenship, hinders the overall welfare of the collective.

Depending on the form of discrimination, types of internalized oppression include internalized racism, internalized homophobia, internalized sexism, internalized ableism, and auto-antisemitism.

Types
Internalized oppression occurs as a result of psychological injury caused by external oppressive events (e.g., harassment and discrimination), and it has a negative impact on individuals' self system (e.g., self-esteem, self-image, self-concept, self-worth, and self-regulation). The trauma of internalized oppression is amplified by repetitive exposure to explicit violence such as segregation and discrimination, as well as implicitly through various forms of oppressive microprocesses and insidious microaggressions (e.g., privation of inclusion and peripheralizing). It may manifest on an individual or group level, and may form as base for in-group conflict and further discrimination that can be hurtful and limiting.

Internalized racism is about fostering a negative attitude towards one's own race, created by the oppressing race, and nurturing a positive attitude towards the oppressor's race (e.g., race traitor). As a result, it leads individuals to experience chronic self-hatred and deny their membership in their own racial group. Over time, it can be an effect of internalized colonialism. As heirs of ingrained assimilation to the oppressor's truth and by nurturing attributional errors, the colonized people gradually accept the oppressor's norm as the norm to follow, often unintentionally and without being aware of it. An example of internalized colonialism on self-perception is the practice of skin whitening (see colorism), which is found in Africa and Asia.

Internalized homophobia, also known as internalized heterosexism, occurs in the LGBT community when individuals adopt a culture's heterosexist attitudes. It has a positive correlation with psychological distress and a negative correlation with self-esteem. Internalized homophobia is strongly associated with guilt and shame (especially among youth) and has been linked to increased anxiety, depression and suicide.

In internalized sexism, individuals (generally women) adopt oppressive attitudes towards their gender which are held by their culture. An example is slut-shaming, where women criticize transgressions of accepted codes of sexual conduct on themselves and other women.

Internalized ableism is often a result of relentless pathologization and lack of or inadequate support disabled people face on a daily basis. The fact the medical establishment is a significant factor that causes and contributes to interalized ableism with frameworks such as the pathology paradigm mean that disabled people trying to enact emancipatory change and self-identify are often deemed as "anti-science" by individuals and institutions which subscribe to scientism. Internalized oppression may also exist among immigrants, and based on the transgenerational trauma, it may affect their descendants as well. When the host community devalues a foreigner's ethnic origin, native language or culture, the immigrant may feel inferior. Prolonged exposure to such devaluation can lead to the well-known inferiority complex among the oppressed. Immigrants who adapt to this environment, according to the psychology of oppression, may adopt the oppressor's guidelines and prohibitions, assimilate their image and social behaviors, and become agents of their own and their community's oppression. This is often characterized by self-hatred, which manifests itself in an exaggerated conformity to dominant norms. To cope, an immigrant may either assimilate and acculturate or develop a Nero complex.

Causes
Internalized oppression "occurs when a person comes to internalize oppressive prejudices and biases about the identity group(s) to which he or she belongs". It occurs when "[s]ocial oppression such as racism, sexism, ableism, classism, heterosexism, gender and religious oppression, and anti-Semitism" are "implanted by and [work] toward the benefit of any dominant group. Internalized oppression "depends on systemically limiting, blocking, and undermining" the "success, innovation, and power" of oppressed individuals or groups. Some individuals will copy (and internalize) "institutionalized rejection of difference," failing "to examine the distortions which result from ... misnaming [these differences] and their effects on human behavior and expectations."

Effects
"If women are surrounded by people who view them as subordinate, incapable, or lacking control over their actions, women are likely to come to understand themselves in a similar way, even if subconsciously." Internalized oppression fosters the beliefs that the self cannot be autonomous, is unworthy of wielding power, and is little more than an object of sexual gratification (see sexual objectification). "Psychological oppression can be damaging to a person's moral relationship with the self ... Since those who have internalized oppressive prejudices often engage in behavior that further perpetuates these biases, internalized oppression is not only a symptom of an oppressive social climate, but it also represents a mechanism for its continued existence". According to University of Massachusetts Amherst doctoral students Valerie Joseph and Tanya O. Williams, "Deep racial self-negation[,] ... internalized racial hatred [and] internalized oppression ... stymied [their] growth as people and scholars [and] inhibited [their] ability to be…profound, strong, and beautiful ..." Individuals can be made to feel "implicated in a project of compliance with the values and goals" of the dominant society. Internalized oppression may also occur in disabled individuals, who may distance themselves from others with disabilities to avoid associating themselves with those who may be viewed by society as "weak" or "lazy". Nabina Liebow wrote, "People of color who internalize stereotypes regarding criminality and moral deviance ... can ... view themselves as outlaws in the moral community" and may "engage in behavior that further perpetuates these biases ... Fulfilling these stereotypes further pushes someone outside the moral fold and intensifies one's damaged moral identity ... [I]nternalizing stereotypes about criminality and moral deviance can lead to a pervasive feeling of guilt ... Persistent feelings of guilt can result in mental-health setbacks such as depression" and "repeated exposure to guilt and similar feelings has been linked with a range of health challenges such as "dysfunctional coping, abdominal obesity, and glucose intolerance complicit in the development of Type 2 diabetes".

Manifestations
According to Audre Lorde, manifestations of internalized oppression include voluntary isolation. She describes the relationship between older members of an oppressed group and younger members of the same group as "contemptible or suspect or excess." [sic] This generation gap leads to "historical amnesia", with oppressed minorities repeating the learning process and failing to convey knowledge to subsequent generations. Lorde cites oppressed individuals as "encouraged to pluck out some one aspect of [one]self and present this as the meaningful whole, eclipsing or denying the other parts of the self"; they may hesitate to breach the false stereotypes surrounding them or verbalize resistance to violence. The most common manifestation is self-hatred.

Racial manifestations include "multifaceted and extreme psychological, social, and economic self-sabotage"; a tendency to "defer to whites", and feelings of being "not black enough". The self is viewed as a diminished, deviant, criminal and undeserving moral agent. Sandra Bartky identified disturbances in body image, gender expression and power dynamics as manifestations of internalized sexism in women.

Remedies
According to Audre Lorde, "[T]he master's tools will never dismantle the master's house ... My fullest concentration of energy is available to me only when I integrate all the parts of who I am, openly, allowing power from the particular sources of my living to flow back and forth freely through all my different selves, without the restrictions of externally imposed definition". "To root out internalized patterns of oppression" women must "recognize differences among women who are our equals, neither inferior nor superior, and devise ways to use each other's difference to enrich our visions and our joint struggles …to identify and develop new definitions of power and new patterns of relating across difference ... sharpen[ing] self-definition by exposing the self in work and struggle together with those whom we define as different from ourselves, although sharing similar goals".

To understand and overcome internalized oppression, Joseph and Williams developed a workshop to "introduce and discuss issues of socialization, stereotyping, internalized oppression, and domination." This "social justice education model ... encouraged an agent/target model of leadership" in which representatives of the oppressor and oppressed classes joined together to guide "participants in developing a plan of action to address racism." They recommended that fear "left over about discussing race, racism, and internalized racism" be set aside to "talk forthrightly, honestly, reflectively, and thoughtfully about race", and the "need to voice ... hurt, the need to surface realities, the need to shine light on a history that was and continues to be ignored" is greater than the fear of discussing the issues. The internally oppressed must learn how they have been indoctrinated, to "engage in a process of rejecting internalized subordination as an everyday choice".

Related theories
French philosopher Michel Foucault "has argued that the rise of parliamentary institutions and of new conceptions of political liberty was accompanied by a darker counter-movement, by the emergence of a new and unprecedented discipline directed against the body. More is required of the body now than mere political allegiance or the approbation of the products of its labor: the new discipline invades the body and seeks to regulate its very forces and operations, the economy and efficiency of its movements ... the production of 'docile bodies' requires that an uninterrupted coercion be directed to the very processes of bodily activity, not just their result; this 'micro-physics of power' fragments and partitions the body's time, its space, and its movements".

The 18th-century English philosopher Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon is a theoretical model of Foucault's ideas. Its constant state of surveillance, imposed by an oppressive external force, serves to induce in the inmate a state of consciousness and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power'; each becomes to himself his own jailer".

title: Internalized oppression


text:
Boatswain's call

A boatswain's call, pipe, or bosun's whistle is a pipe or a non-diaphragm type whistle used on naval ships by a boatswain.

The pipe consists of a narrow tube (the gun) which directs air over a metal sphere (the buoy) with a hole in the top. The player opens and closes the hand over the hole to change the pitch. The rest of the pipe consists of a "keel", a flat piece of metal beneath the gun that holds the call together, and the "shackle", a keyring that connects a long silver or brass chain that sits around the collar, when in ceremonial uniform.

History and usage

Historically the boatswain's call was used to pass commands to the crew when the voice could not be heard over the sounds of the sea. Because of its high pitch, it could be heard over the activities of the crew and bad weather. It is now used in traditional bugle calls such as Evening Colors/Sunset, and in other ceremonies in most modern navies. It is sometimes accompanied by other auditive features such as ruffles and flourishes, voice commands and announcements, or even a gun salute.

It was first used as a badge of rank for the Lord High Admiral of England in 1485.

Honouring

 * Pipe Aboard/Ashore: Flag-rank officers or an important guest is boarding or departing a Navy ship; also used to mark the final departure of a sailor retiring from active duty. This is part of a ceremony called "manning the side" which includes a party of sailors known as "side boys". It has its origins in the need to hoist visiting senior officers aboard using a bosun's chair when the weather was too rough for the use of ladders. The bosun would use his call to direct the side boys in the hoisting of the chair.
 * Funerals: When the body of a person entitled to honours in their lifetime is taken aboard a Navy ship, the same ceremony is observed.

Commands
The following are the commands that are passed with the help of a bosun's pipe.
 * Haul: The most basic of calls. Crews of warships were not allowed to sing work songs or shanties, so the pipe coordinated the sailors. The low note was for the pause and preparatory; the high for pulling on the line.
 * The Side or Away Galley: Descends from the tradition of hoisting officers aboard ship in a chair. It is a combination of haul, and then a command to lower. This call remains in use as an honour given to officers when embarking or disembarking.
 * Away Boats: Used to order a ship's boats to leave the ship's side.
 * Call the Boatswain's Mates: The boatswain's gang to report.
 * All Hands on Deck: Crews were split into three (or earlier, two) rotating watches that stood for two to four hours at a time. This call signals the entire crew to assemble on deck.
 * Word to be Passed: Command for silence, an order to follow.
 * Pipe Down: Dismissal of all the crew not on watch.
 * Sweepers: End of the work day. Ostensibly sailors would "sweep up" prior to departure in preparation for the following day.
 * Pipe to any meal: Pipe All Hands, followed by long Heave Around (Mess gear), and long Pipe Down.
 * Still: Used to call the crew to attention. This would be done, for example, when two warships meet, the still being piped as the junior ship salutes the senior ship (the seniority of a warship is the seniority of her captain); a less common alternative to the still being piped is a bugle call.
 * Carry On: Used after the still, to dismiss the crew back to their duties.
 * General Call: Piped before an announcement.
 * Officer of the Day: Call the Officer of the Day to the Gangway.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Boatswain's call


text:
User talk:TheCustomOfLife/DAYSPictures

Nice pics from that August 1990 episode about Patch and Kayla Johnson's 2nd wedding! - Anonymous

title: User talk:TheCustomOfLife/DAYSPictures


text:
User talk:Yonthe

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 15:13, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Image:Parkstadlimburg-stadion.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Parkstadlimburg-stadion.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Sherool (talk) 11:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Yonthe. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Yonthe~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 03:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Copying licensed material requires attribution
Hi. I see in a recent addition to European Union value added tax you included material from a webpage that is available under a compatible Creative Commons Licence. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 00:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yonthe


text:
User talk:Bpasero

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 15:13, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rssowl big.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Rssowl big.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bpasero


text:
User talk:JanKG

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 15:14, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:JanKG


text: User talk:65.175.226.59

title: User talk:65.175.226.59


text:
Talk:Jaguar XJ

Comment
I changed what I considered to be not only unfair but competitors" line.--JonGwynne 15:20, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I owned a 1973 XJ6 Series I for a number of years. It had a 4.2 litre engine but I see no mention of this engine size in the article. I'll add it. -- Derek Ross | Talk 05:40, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)

I have owned two XJ40s and an X300, and I would have to agree, the leg room in the back is very poor, especially if the driver/passenger have the seat far back (as I did). Jaguar improved things with the long wheelbase version. I read somewhere, that the British Prime Minister John Major used to complain about it! Still a great car, all the same.--Stuart 11:02, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I own a 1990 XJR. Now there were I believe several versions of this: 1. The original TWR Jaguar conversion, which perhaps does not belong in this article except as the heritage of the XJR itself. 2. What I would think of as the 'pucker' one, which is a 4 Litre XJ40 with bodykit, interior changes to wheel and seats, different wheels, uprated brakes and suspension, and uprated valves to the engine. There may be other differences but these are the main ones. 3. A version which comes in a 3.6 Litre form, and perhaps as a 4 Litre (though I have never come across one), which has just the wheels and styling details. I do think a complete history of the XJ warrants a mention of these models (ie both the XJR and the RS) as they are a rare and rapidly disappearing part of the XJ40 history. The first XJR's were produced by Jaguar after their sports director had a Jaguar badged XJR made with the TWR modifications (in fact the vehicle I own) following which Jaguar received requests for the model and made a limited edition of only 200 of them. I'm afraid most of this is hearsay and talk with the few other remaining XJR owners and the previous owner of mine, so any corrections are welcome. 88.97.28.108 (talk) 15:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

OK We are starting to get somewhere: Official from Jaguar Heritate Trust: There is no detailed history of the TWR JaguarSport cars as such. We have no production figures at all for the pre-1988 XJS cars modified by TWR. Precise production figures of the later "official" JaguarSport converted cars are not available either but we estimate there were around 2200-2400 XJ40s and perhaps 200-plus XJS V12 5.3 litre cars modified by JaguarSport to XJR-S specification in 1988-89, including the 100 "Le Mans Celebration" models. There were 837 XJR-S 6 litre cars built in-house by Jaguar from 1989 to 1993, including 50 convertibles. The XJ 40 XJR cars can be identified by VIN or chassis numbers with a prefix starting SAJ-JPAL and in case of the 4 litre cars by an engine number with a prefix starting 9WPF. The XJR-S cars can be identified by VIN or chassis numbers with a prefix starting SAJ-JSAE, and the 6 litre cars have an engine number starting 8W, whereas later non-XJRS 6 litre XJS cars have an engine type 8D.

I am now getting back in touch with John Hook of QCR who currently own the body moulds and who did a lot of the work on the TWR's originally to try to get more info. 88.97.28.108 (talk) 15:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Mk1, Mk2, Mk3
I have never known the Jaguar XJ Series to be catagorised in this manor. Having worked at Whitley for 4 years I can catagorically say that this is something that was an unofficial desination. Furthermore, being an avid follower of Jaguar cars it seems that this designation has only been used by the author of this article. It seems a bit awkward to me. The saloons have always proceeded as S1, S2, S3, XJ40, X300, X350. LewisR 11:37, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

XJC, XJ Coupes?
I would very much appreciate more details about this model, many thanks.

 * I've recently seen a small article in a magazine from around 1987-88, featuring a 2-door coupe version of the then current XJ. IIRC Bob "Panther" Jankel was the man responsible. Mr Larrington (talk) 14:10, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

'Most Powerful Diesel Engine in the World?
As far as I'm aware, this is not the case when talking of the XJ's 2.7, and I've changed that. Daimler 00:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC).

No, you're correct. It wasn't when it was launched and isn't by some margin now. "in the world" would probably be in a ship or somesuch. BMW's 3.0 in the 535D probably holds that title for that in a car.

 * VW's V10 TDi is a likely candidate. Mr Larrington (talk) 14:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Chevrolet V8 engine swaps
Since the introduction of the XJ series (pre-Ford era), some Jag owners who claim that the stock motor (either the inline six or V12) were usually swapped for a Chevrolet small block since the automatic tranny which was standard with the Jag (THM400) was used with GM powerplants. Pre-1998 XJs also came with the 4L80-E tranny (same tranny from the Chevrolet/GMC C/K series (GMT400) where it is likely for an LS1 swap.4.230.54.128 18:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Picture/text mismatch
UNder heading on side box "series II" is a picture of a Series III. Just being pedantic user:winstonwolfe

Picture not a mismatch
The picture actually is a Series II - it's a very late one, a 1980, built in Cape Town, South Africa. On the late Series II models (1978 onward, I think), the chrome bumpers were replaced by massive steel bumpers covered with a black rubber skin. These bumpers weren't the Series 3 ones - they were at least twice as deep, and of a completely different design. Some of the Series II cars, like mine, as shown in the picture, had the grid section of the grille coated black, leaving the surround and central rib in chrome. This was different from the Series 3 chrome vertical grille. The wheels are the starfish alloys; the Series 3, I think, used the pepperpot alloys (though perhaps the early Series 3s used the starfish wheels too). This car does have the big square mirrors that were introduced on the Series 3 - I think that the 1979-onward Series II may have used them. - Claidheamhmor 06:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Can we get a better Series 2 picture. Although this is technically a Series 2, it is hardly a typical example and does not indicate what most Series 2s looked like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.109.78.50 (talk) 11:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Daimler XJ6 4.0 1990. Fuel requirement
Having just aquired the above vehicle, could anyone say if it requires 98 octane fuel, or will it run on 95 octane?83.76.199.139 23:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)Reg Routh

 * I would be inclined to say that 95 should be OK. However, take a look at the XJ40 mailing list and info at Jag-Lovers, and they should be able to give you more accurate info. - Claidheamhmor 07:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I own 2 XJ 40's, a 91 and a 94. Both have well over 155K miles. Weaned them off of premium and onto plain old 89 Octane with no problems.

X300/X308 Project Codes
I'm not 100% sure that X305 & X308 was ever Jaguar's official designation of the V8 X300. I was at Jaguar's engineering centre for 4 years when the "300" was current and that's how we always referred to it, I6, V12 or V8. The vehicle codes typically referred to a body shell in white (BIW) and not a vehicle model/engine configuration. The bodyshell for the in-line 6 (AJ16) engined XJ was, as far as I know, unchanged when it took the V8 (AJ26). Therefore, a project name change would have been unlikely.

LewisR 00:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

LWB X350
As far as I am aware, the LWB X350 is known as the X355.

LewisR 00:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Safety
The DFT Statistics do *not* show this about the XJ Series. So I have removed it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.145.105.149 (talk) 15:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

X300 Changes to X308
"1997 saw the "Mark 2" XJ revised for a final time, and this time the car (known as X308) had changed more over the X300 than the X300 had done over the XJ40."

This seems a bit subjective and non-quantitive.

The X300 received the follwing changes from the XJ40:

-Bonnet

-Front wings

-Rear wings

-Boot lid

-Self-levelling rear suspension dropped

-ZF steering rack

-Seats

-Revised cylinder head induction porting

-Revised camshafts

-Pistons

-Power & torque for both engine sizes up by around 9% & 5% respectively

The XJ8 received no BIW changes from X300 but did have the AJ27 engine. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not convinced that X308 was ever an official project code at Whitley.

LewisR 00:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

AJ6 Engine
The article states (under the XJ40 title):

"The single cam 2.9 L straight-6 engine found in Europe was a derivative of Jaguar's legendary 6.0 L V12 HE, but it proved to be underpowered and thirsty compared to the 3.6 L"

The 3.6l engine (AJ6) had been used in the XJS since 1983 and it was that engine that was originally a derivative of the V12 engine. The 2.9l engine used the same block retaining the 91.0mm bore but had a reduced stroke (74.8mm from 92.0mm). The 2.9l engine does have May designed combustion chambers and SOHC which the HE V12 had.

LewisR 00:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

X350 Overview
"The Super V8, also known as the Daimler Super Eight, is the fastest and most expensive model, with the XJR a close second."

The Daimler Super V8 uses the same engine and transmission as the XJR but being in a longer bodyshell and having more equipment will be heavier than the XJR and therefore will not be faster. Furthermore, it is MUCH more expensive (£80,040 vs £62,040 )

LewisR 01:01, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

where can I find the paint code on a 1990 jaguar xj6
I have recently aquired the above car and there is s small bit of fust from an accident I want to cover. Please can someone tell me where to locate the paint code. The only thing I can see is BEC7828   but I don`t think that is it. Please help, Martyn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.136.215 (talk) 10:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

is the 90 xj6 front whell drive?
hi,can any one tell me if it's front wheel drive? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.159.238 (talk) 14:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No, it's not. All XJ Jaguars have been rear-wheel drive. Claidheamhmor (talk) 06:07, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

XJC12 Broadspeed.
I've been trying to find out about the XJC12 Broadspeed and I'm surprised they aren't mentioned at all. Steed had one in the new avengers and I believe they raced them in the 70's. Does anyone know anything about them? Also, was the x300 really available with a manual box because I've never heard or seen such a thing.(82.3.42.38 (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC))

 * With about 550 bhp on tape they were fast but not very reliable and terribly hard on brakes, even with water-cooling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Larrington (talk • contribs) 14:06, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Splitting
Could this article be splitted into smaller pieces? For example BMW 5-series has own article for every generation and only some facts on the "main" page. That would make this much easier. I dont know how it is done but someone should take this into consideration 212.149.213.242 (talk) 17:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

AJ Gen III Engine
The project code for this is AJ133. I don't know of any use of the "AJ Gen III" outside this article.

LewisR (talk) 21:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

What's an "egghead option"?
From the "Series 1 (1968–1973)" subsection:

 * In 1972 the egghead option of a long wheel base version, providing a modest increase in leg room for passengers in the back, became available.

I have no idea what an "egghead option" might be, and Google returns well under 200 hits for the phrase, which suggests it's not simply an Americanism I haven't come across. (On which note, why the repeated use of "sedan" in an article written in British English?) Is there any reason not simply to delete the word "egghead" and leave it as "In 1972 the option of..."? Loganberry (Talk) 23:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

 * Just looks like vandalism to me. The single word was added back in February by an anonymous user.  I'll remove it now. Heep (talk) 12:00, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

MK 4??
This article really is becoming a mess. The X351 is being called the MK4 when it's very similar underneath to the X350 MK3 (hence the similiarity in project codes). XJ40 & X308 are both being seen as MK2s. IMO, the "MK" designation should be ditched. Jaguar don't and didn't ever use it and I've never seen it used in any motoring publications. LewisR (talk) 14:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

 * I agree. Would like to see the "MK" designation ditched.  Yiba (talk) 13:11, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

XJ40 1994+
I thought there were models of the XJ40 post 1994 but the article doesn't make any mention of it. Anyone have any idea? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozkidzez91 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

 * No, production of XJ40 ceased during 1994 (probably during the summer when production was shifting to the X300) –Magnus Bäck (talk) 19:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Banger racers?
What are UK banger racers? And who says they're popular? Unclear terminology and unsourced. Vince (talk) 07:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Fuel Consumption details
I have just purchased a Jaguar Daimlar 4:0 litre Soverign and cannot find any details of the general day to day fuel comsumption can any feed me the details many thanks Stuart —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.117.82.3 (talk) 14:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Rated as B-Class and rated as Mid-importance
Both ratings are unfortunate, but perhaps understandable. While highly informative and interesting, the article suffers from being, in my view, imperfectly finished and inadequately sourced. For example I would cite the typo 'desiginging' and the (to me anyway) jarring construction 'wheel base'. There is an almost total lack of sources in certain sections, and an IMHO regrettable lack of hyperlinking to other Wikipedia articles. In my opinion, this article does not (yet) do justice to one of the UK's most iconic and revered cars. I would gladly jump in myself and copy-edit it; however I do not have enough knowledge of the subject. I am also not (yet) a registered editor on Wikipedia. Maybe a Wikipedia editor with more knowledge of the subject than me could do so? 78.20.145.31 (talk) 18:30, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Have a look at the BMW 5 Series section and it is very well laid out. Each model has a brief summary and thena link tgo a page for that generation specifically. It's quite a big demand to do this for the XJ but I think it warrants it. As I'm a developmenty engineer at Jaguar Cars I really should do it myself but it's time and we're very busy! LewisR (talk) 03:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

 * I'm working on improving this. I've already created main articles for the XJ40, X300, and X308 specifically. Model-by-model information and technical details should go there, and the general XJ article should be modeled after the one for the Chevrolet Corvette, where each generation of the car has a few paragraphs of summary and a link to the main article for that generation. This should make the general XJ article significantly smaller and more manageable. I may need to defer to others to write the Jaguar XJ (Series) article; one of the XJ40/X300/X308 articles should probably be used as a template. --ColinMB (talk) 14:38, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Series 3
"with shallower glass area" surely this should be "with deeper glass area and narrower pillars". The subtle redesign gave the XJ a much brighter cabin with bigger windows, just look at the photographs. DesmondW (talk) 19:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

XJ-C Coupe
I found this image in the Wikimedia Commons and thought that it would be better than the current image, which doesn't really show the coupe's profile. I just was a bit nervous about adding it, since I'm not sure where it should go. (Replace the image in the info-box, or under the Coupe sub-section?) If others approve, it should probably be added to the main XJ page.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jaguar_XJ12_Coupe_PI_dutch_licence_registration_93-FF-RB_pic_4.JPG PVarjak (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Given that the Coupe's real feature is how it looks at the rear I think it is reasonable to add a rear three-quarters view. My only objection to the one you propose is that it has people in it. What about the alternative one? It has other cars in the background, sure, but I think that is preferable to random people. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:08, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

XJ7?
Is this a Jag XJ7?

Or this? --98.122.20.56 (talk) 05:03, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jaguar XJ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090713021016/http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/Jaguar-XJ-Series/241405/ to http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/Jaguar-XJ-Series/241405/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:32, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

the xj6 was my design in 1966 as a class project at MIT
The Jaguar XJ6 was -my- design. 1966. This is the real story. 03/16/23

Way back in 1966, I was a student at MIT in Course II, Mechanical Engineering. I signed up to take a course in Automotive Design from Professor Fay. When the course began, Professor Fay said that we would be working in two-person teams on an automotive design project with specific design guidelines. Our project had a corporate sponsor that he could not disclose at this time. He made it clear that our designs would be turned over to and reviewed by the sponsor, and would not be returned.

(I knew that Professor Fay was English, and I suspected the sponsor might be Jaguar.)

We split into the two-person teams, and my teammate and I discussed our various design ideas multiple times. We had a good concept. I had spent the previous two summers as a detail draftsman at Chevrolet Engineering Center in Michigan, so we agreed I should draw up a detail version of our conceptual design. So, I sat down with my drawing board and drafting equipment, and drew my (our) design on large format blueprint paper. To scale, with front, top, back and side views. I remember going out and measuring my own car's tires and rims, front and rear chassis overhangs (a 1966 Oldsmobile Cutlass convertible that year), and other dimensions, to get the scale and proportions right.

My teammate and I reviewed the design, agreed, and made sure both of our names were on the drawing. My (our) design was influenced by the fact that I had once been able to drive a Jaguar XKE, so the design had low, smooth lines, with enough hood space for a V-12. Plus, a curvaceous body that would be roomy, but able to both look good and navigate through traffic easily. We turned in our drawing in class on the due date.

A couple of weeks later, in our final class, Professor Fay addressed the class and said something like the following: “Students, thank you all for your designs,  I can tell you now that our project sponsor was Jaguar. I met with their board of directors last night, and they reviewed all of your designs. There was one design they especially liked, and - they're going to build it!” He then named me and my teammate. The class cheered. We got A's, of course.

Looking at the actual Jaguar XJ6 delivered in 1968 – yes, indeed, they built what I drew. No doubt. The rear antenna, the dual headlights with a fender groove, the hood ornament, the windshield slope, the small rear side windows, the 'attitude', the fender shapes, the body proportions, the bumpers – I remember drawing it all, as if I was building it. And yes, they did!

Jaguar has never credited me or my teammate for any aspect of this design. We felt, in 1966, that if we were to ask for royalties or other recognition, they wouldn't have built it. Yet – my (our) design and its offshoots endured for over 40 years. Jaguar, of course, has its own story about the XJ6 design origins.

Maury Stauffer (Maurice H. Stauffer, S.B., S.M, Mechanical Engineering 1967, XSM Sloan 1969) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:58C:4303:F50:4D27:3CC3:3677:1206 (talk) 02:15, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jaguar XJ


text: User talk:81.155.67.15

title: User talk:81.155.67.15


text:
Asbestos and the law

The mineral asbestos is subject to a wide range of laws and regulations that relate to its production and use, including mining, manufacturing, use and disposal. Injuries attributed to asbestos have resulted in both workers' compensation claims and injury litigation. Health problems attributed to asbestos include asbestosis, mesothelioma, lung cancer, and diffuse pleural thickening.

One of the major issues relating to asbestos in civil proceedings is the latency of asbestos-related diseases. Most countries have limitation periods to bar actions that are taken long after the cause of action has lapsed. For example, in Malaysia the time period to file a tort action is six years from the time the tort occurred. Due to several asbestos-related actions, countries such as Australia have amended their laws relating to limitations to accumulate starting from time of discovery rather than time when the cause of action accrued. The first employee claims for injury from exposure to asbestos in the workplace were made in 1927, and the first lawsuit against an asbestos manufacturer was filed in 1929. Since then, many lawsuits have been filed. As a result of the litigation, manufacturers sold off subsidiaries, diversified, produced asbestos substitutes, and started asbestos removal businesses.

Worldwide, 67 countries and territories (including those in the European Union) have banned the use of asbestos. It is listed as a category of controlled waste under Annex I of the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal [1992]. This means that parties to the convention are required to prohibit the export of hazardous wastes to parties which have prohibited the import of such wastes via the notification procedure in Article 13 of the convention. In places such as India, however, there continues to be a high use of friable or dust-based asbestos in compressed asbestos fiber (CAF) gaskets, ropes, cloth, gland packings, millboards, insulation, brake liners, and other products which are being exported without adequate knowledge and information to the other countries. Asbestos use is prevalent in India because there is no effective enforcement of the rules.

Background
In the late 19th century and early 20th century, asbestos was considered an ideal material for use in the construction industry. It was known to be an excellent fire retardant, to have high electrical resistance, and was inexpensive and easy to use.

The dangers related to asbestos arise mainly when the fibers become airborne and are inhaled. Because of the size of the fibers, the lungs cannot expel them. These fibers are also sharp and penetrate internal tissues.

Health problems attributed to asbestos include:

 * 1) Asbestosis - A lung disease first found in textile workers,  asbestosis is a scarring of the lung tissue resulting from the production of growth factors that stimulate fibroblasts (the scar-producing lung cells) to proliferate and synthesize the scar tissue in response to injury by the inhaled fibers.  The scarring may eventually become so severe that the lungs can no longer function. The latency period (meaning the time it takes for the disease to develop) is often 10–20 years.
 * 2) Mesothelioma - A cancer of the mesothelial lining of the lungs and the chest cavity, the peritoneum (abdominal cavity) or the pericardium (a sac surrounding the heart). Unlike lung cancer, mesothelioma has no association with smoking. The only established causal factor is exposure to asbestos or similar fibers. The latency period for mesothelioma may be 20–50 years. The prognosis for mesothelioma is grim, with most patients dying within 12 months of diagnosis.
 * 3) Cancer - Cancer of the lung, gastrointestinal tract, kidney and larynx have been linked to asbestos. The latency period for cancer is often 15–30 years.
 * 4) Diffuse pleural thickening

Considerable international controversy exists regarding the perceived rights and wrongs associated with litigation on compensation claims related to asbestos exposure and alleged subsequent medical consequences. Some measure of the vast range of views expressed in legal and political circles can perhaps be exemplified by the two quotes below, the first from Prof. Lester Brickman, an American legal ethicist writing in the Pepperdine Law Review, and second, Michael Wills, a British Member of Parliament, speaking in the House of Commons on July 13. 2006:

"'A review of the scholarly literature indicates a substantial degree of indifference to the causes of this civil justice system failure. Many of the published articles on asbestos litigation focus on transactional costs and ways in which the flow of money from defendants to plaintiffs and their lawyers can be expeditiously and efficiently prioritized and routed. The failure to acknowledge, let alone analyze, the overriding reality of specious claiming and meritless claims demonstrates a disconnect between the scholarship and the reality of the litigation that is nearly as wide as the disconnect between rates of disease claiming and actual disease manifestation'."

"'Many of those who I see in my surgeries have worked in a number of workplaces and they could have been exposed to asbestos in each of them, but medical science is such that no one can identify which of them it is. As a result, there has been a long and complex history of legal discussion on how to apportion liability. The lawyers and the judiciary have wrestled, rightly and valiantly, with complex and difficult law, but it has created despair for the families whom we represent. Many of my constituents' families have been riven by the consequences of litigation in trying to get some compensation for a disease that has been contracted through no fault of theirs. That is cruel and unacceptable.'"

Complete bans on asbestos
Worldwide, 68 countries and territories (including those in the European Union) have banned the use of asbestos. Exemptions for minor uses are permitted in some countries listed; however, all countries listed must have banned the use of all types of asbestos.

International law
Asbestos is listed as a category of controlled waste under Annex I of the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal [1992]. Specifically, any waste streams having asbestos (dust and fibers) as constituents are controlled (Item Y36). In general terms, Parties to the convention are required to prohibit and not permit the export of hazardous wastes to the Parties which have prohibited the import of such wastes via the notification procedure in Article 13 of the convention.

Australia
A nationwide ban on importing and using all forms asbestos took effect on 31 December 2003. Reflecting the ban, the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (NOHSC) revised asbestos-related material to promote a consistent approach to controlling exposure to workplace asbestos and to introduce best-practice health and safety measures for asbestos management, control and removal. The ban does not cover asbestos materials or products already in use at the time the ban was implemented.

Although Australia has only a third of the UK's population, its asbestos disease fatalities approximate Britain's of more than 3,000 people per year.

Western Australia' center of blue asbestos mining was Wittenoom. The mine was run by CSR Limited (a company that had been the Colonial Sugar Refinery). The main manufacturer of asbestos products was James Hardie, which set up a minor fund for its workers, then transferred operations to the Netherlands where it would be out of reach of the workers when the fund expired.

Brazil
The São Paulo State law 12.684/07 prohibits the use of any product which utilizes asbestos. This legislation has been formally upheld by the Brazilian Supremo Tribunal Federal.

Canada
Since the 1980s, Canada has not permitted crocidolite asbestos to be used and has had limitations on certain uses of other types of asbestos, notably in some construction materials and textiles.

In late 2011, Canada's remaining two asbestos mines, both located in the Province of Quebec, halted operations. The following year, Quebec's government announced a halt to asbestos mining and the federal government announced that it would end its opposition to adding chrysotile asbestos to the list of hazardous substances under the international Rotterdam Convention.

In 2018, the Canadian federal government posted proposed regulations planned for implementation later that year, which would prohibit use, sale, import, and export of all forms of asbestos. Since 30 December 2018, the import, sale, and use of raw asbestos have been formally prohibited, and products containing asbestos are also banned except for certain specialized uses, such as in nuclear facilities.

France
France banned the use of asbestos in 1997, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) upheld France's right to the ban in 2000. In addition, France has called for a worldwide ban.

Hong Kong
The import, shipment, supply of, and use of all forms of asbestos is banned in Hong Kong under the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (Cap. 311).

Before the 1980s, use of the material was common in construction, manufacturing, and shipping. The government banned the use of most asbestos products in public areas in 1978. The Factories and Industrial Undertakings (Asbestos) Special Regulation (Cap. 59X), which came into force in 1986, and the subsequent Factories and Industrial Undertakings (Asbestos) Regulation (Cap. 59AD) implemented controls on the use of asbestos in the workplace and banned the use of amphibole asbestos completely.

The import of amosite or crocidolite to Hong Kong was banned in 1996 by the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (Cap. 311). On 4 April 2014, the Air Pollution Control (Amendment) Ordinance 2014 came into force, completely banning the import, transshipment, supply and installation of all forms of asbestos and asbestos-containing materials in Hong Kong by amending the existing Air Pollution Control Ordinance. Buildings built before the mid 1980s may continue the use of asbestos-containing materials.

India
The Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of the Government of India states "Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out."

In Case No.693/30/97-98, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has clearly directed to "Replace all asbestos sheets roofing with roofing made up of some other material that would not be harmful to inmates."

The Secretary of the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research (PGIMER, Chandigarh also voiced its opinion "Asbestos is definitely a harmful material, it causes cancer and other related diseases." In their complete statement and recommendation to NHRC they have clearly expressed their concern: "White asbestos (chrysotile asbestos) is implicated in so many studies with the following diseases: Mesothelioma (cancer of pleura), Lung Cancer, Peritoneal Cancer, Asbestosis, and is also considered as a cause for Ovarian Cancer, Laryngeal Cancer, Other Cancererous Diseases are produced in the person involved in Asbestos Industry." It concludes its position by specifying, "Hence, Use of White Asbestos should be completely banned in India and the same may be replaced by some safer alternative material."

The Joint Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand in Case No.2951/30/0/2011, submitted to the NHRC that "There is no cure for Asbestos Diseases. Stopping all exposure to Asbestos is only essential."

The Union Ministry of Labour's concept paper declared, "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." The Concept paper further notes, "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concentrated efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace".

The Indian Factory Act and Bureau of Indian Standard already have rules and regulations for safe usage of asbestos contaminated products such as:
 * IS 11769 Part 1: Guidelines for Safe Usage of Asbestos Cement Products like Asbestos Cement Sheets and Asbestos Cement Blocks.
 * IS 11769 Part 2: Guidelines for Safe Usage of Asbestos Friction Products like Asbestos Friction Sheets and Brake Liners
 * IS 11769 Part 3: Guidelines for Safe Usage of Asbestos Sealing and Insulation Products like CAF Gaskets, Gland Ropes, Insulation, Rope Lagging, Millboard
 * IS 12081: Pictorial Warning to be implemented on equipment containing Asbestos Contaminated Products.
 * IS 11451: Safety and Health Requirements related to Occupational Exposure to Asbestos contaminated Products.
 * IS 11768: Waste Disposal Procedure for Asbestos Containing Products.

However, there is no enforcement of the rules at ground level, hence asbestos usage is prevalent without following even the simplest basic safety rules.

The Centre for Pollution Control Board struggles to enforce their own guidelines for asbestos as hazardous waste and relies on industries and companies to volunteer themselves to follow Safety Regulations.

There continues to be a high usage of friable or dust based asbestos in compressed asbestos fiber (CAF) gaskets, ropes, cloth, gland packings, millboards, insulation and brake liners in factories and industries within India as well as inadvertently exported by equipment manufacturers without adequate knowledge and information to the other countries.

On 21 January 2011, the Supreme Court of India reiterated the guidelines laid down by it in the 1995 judgement regarding asbestos.

In spite of the health hazards, asbestos is widely used in India without any restriction. Activists in India and abroad have tried to persuade the governments of Canada and Quebec to stop asbestos mining in Quebec and exporting to India. The Canadian government has repeatedly blocked asbestos being listed as a hazardous chemical by the UN even though it spends massive amounts of money to remove it from Canadian homes and offices. While India recognizes it as a hazardous substance and has banned asbestos mining and its waste trade, it keeps its price low through patronage.

On 15 August 2016, in the strongest statement till date, the Anil Madhav Dave, Union Minister of Environment, Forest & Climate Change categorically specified "Since the use of asbestos is affecting human health, its usage should gradually be minimised and ended. As far as I know, its use is declining, but it must end"

The Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) has been working towards an asbestos free India to safeguard the health of the present and future generations amidst the misinformation campaign of the White Chrysotile Industry.

On 5 May 2017, India opposed listing of asbestos under the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) list of hazardous substances during the 2017 United Nations Rotterdam Convention. As such, India is the second democracy (after Russia) to have such a stance, globally. Besides India, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Syria, and Zimbabwe also opposed the listing. While, all the other countries opposing are producers of asbestos; India (where mining is banned) is the sole (and largest) consumer and importer of asbestos still opposing its inclusion on the PIC List.

The National Asbestos Profile of India made in cooperation by Peoples Training and Research Centre, Vadodara, Occupational & Environmental Health Network of India, New Delhi and Asia Monitor Resource Centre, Hong Kong is the first such attempt and resource for identifying total asbestos usage in India. This extensive profile documents the manufacturers, consumers, health and disease statistics of asbestos use in India.

Italy
Italy fully banned the use of asbestos in 1992 with law 257/92 art. 1 and set up a comprehensive plan for asbestos decontamination in industry and housing.

Japan
Japan did not fully ban asbestos until 2004. Its government has been held responsible for related diseases.

Philippines
The Philippines has a limited ban on asbestos. While the use of amphibole asbestos is banned as early as 2000 through Administrative Order for the Chemical Control Order of Asbestos issued by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, chrysotile asbestos is allowed for use in specific high density products.

Poland
Poland fully banned asbestos in 1997. Since then the import of asbestos and products containing it, production of anything containing asbestos and circulation of asbestos and products which have it is prohibited.

South Africa
Asbestos was banned in South Africa in 2008. Prior to this, the country was one of the global leaders in asbestos production, and consequently had one of the highest rates of mesothelioma. Regulations to ban asbestos in South Africa occurred in March 2008 under the leadership of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk. The first draft regulations were announced in November 2005 for public comment and again in September 2007. The regulations prohibited the use, processing, manufacturing, and import and export of any asbestos or asbestos-containing materials (ACMs). A grace period of 120 days was allowed to give people or traders currently dealing in asbestos or ACMs to clear their stock. Exemptions would be granted under strict control. The regulations did not prohibit the continued use of asbestos-containing materials that were already in place such as asbestos-cement roof sheets or ceilings, the department was satisfied that there was "no undue risk" and they would be replaced in due time. Penalties for the continued use of asbestos include a fine which would not exceed R100 000 and/or imprisonment of less than ten years. Prior to the regulations' implementation, asbestos had been in the process of being phased out from as early as 2003. Requests from Zimbabwe and Canada to be excepted from the prohibition were denied. South Africa also terminated all import of asbestos or ACMs from Zimbabwe. South Africa would allow products to pass through its borders while in transit under strict conditions and if registered with the department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. Everite, a building company, supported the government's ban on imports from Zimbabwe It became an offence to acquire, process, package or repackage, manufacture or distribute these products from after July 28, 2008. Kgalagadi Relief Trust (KRT) chair Brian Gibson stated that asbestos may still be imported into South Africa for research or analysis. Asbestos may also be imported into the country for disposal from Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries that were unable to dispose of the waste themselves.

South Korea
In May 1997, the manufacture and use of crocidolite and amosite, commonly known as blue and brown asbestos, were fully banned in South Korea. In January 2009, a full-fledged ban on all types of asbestos occurred when the government banned the manufacture, import, sale, storage, transport or use of asbestos or any substance containing more than 0.1% of asbestos. In 2011, South Korea became the world's sixth country to enact an asbestos harm aid act, which entitles any Korean citizen to free lifetime medical care as well as monthly income from the government if they are diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease.

New Zealand
In 1984, the import of raw amphibole (blue and brown) asbestos into New Zealand was banned. In 2002, the import of chrysotile (white) asbestos was banned.

United Kingdom
The British Government's Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has promoted rigorous controls on asbestos handling, based on reports linking exposure to asbestos dust or fibres with thousands of annual deaths from mesothelioma and asbestos-related lung cancer.
 * "Over 5,000 asbestos-related disease deaths per year currently (2022)"
 * The TUC (UK) cited a figure of 5,000 deaths per year in 2004.

The HSE does not assume that there is any minimum threshold for exposure to asbestos below which a person is at zero risk of developing mesothelioma, since they consider that it cannot currently be quantified for practical purposes; they cite evidence from epidemiological studies of asbestos-exposed groups to argue that even if there is any such threshold for mesothelioma, it must be at a very low level. Previously it was possible to claim compensation for pleural plaques caused by negligent exposure to asbestos, on the grounds that although it is in itself asymptomatic, it is linked to development of diffuse pleural thickening, which causes lung impairment. It has been highly contentious, however, as to the probability of pleural plaques developing into pleural thickening or other asbestos-related illnesses. On October 17, 2007, this point was clarified by the Law Lords' ruling that workers who have pleural plaques as a result of asbestos exposure will no longer be able to seek compensation as it does not in itself constitute a disease. This ruling was, however, superseded, so far as sufferers of pleural plaques in Scotland are concerned, by the passing of the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions)(Scotland) Act 2009, which provides that in Scots law pleural plaques are to be considered an actionable type of personal injury.

Control of Asbestos Regulations
The Control of Asbestos Regulations were introduced in the UK in November 2006 and were an amalgamation of three previous sets of legislation (Asbestos Prohibition, Asbestos Licensing and the Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations) aimed at minimising the use and disturbance of asbestos containing materials within British workplaces. Essentially this legislation bans the import and use of most asbestos products and sets out guidelines on how best to manage those currently in situ.

The Control of Asbestos Regulations were amended and the revised regulations came into force on 6 April 2012 to take account of the European Commission's view that the UK had not fully implemented the EU Directive on exposure to asbestos (Directive 2009/148/EC). These changes were relatively minor and included additional requirements for non-licensed asbestos work. These changes mean that some non-licensed asbestos work now requires notification, and has additional requirements for managing this work (e.g. record keeping and health surveillance).

Dutyholders of all non-domestic properties within the UK must establish an asbestos register and a management plan. The definition of "non-domestic" is "a property or structure (commercial, domestic or residential) where work is carried out" and the obligation of a "dutyholder" is to ensure that people are not exposed to any asbestos-based materials during the course of their work. The Asbestos Register states the presence or non-presence of asbestos related to the inside and outside of the structure. The exception is where the property age (post-1999 when chrysotile asbestos was banned) would indicate that such products will not have been used during the construction of the building.

Regulation 4 prescribes that each non-domestic building's "dutyholder", as defined in law, has a duty to manage the risk from asbestos and mandates that "a suitable and sufficient assessment is carried out". Risk assessment involves a combination of factors relating to the type and condition of the asbestos-containing materials and the likelihood of disturbance and exposure. Human exposure potential depends on the number of occupants in a building and the frequency and duration of use, and the nature of any disturbance: for example, intrusive maintenance activity within the building increases the risk of exposure - removing a number of asbestos-containing ceiling tiles to undertake works above the ceiling level would raise greater risks than changing a light bulb. Buildings may be ranked according to whether disturbance activity is undertaken:

 * rare disturbance activity, e.g. a little-used store room
 * low disturbance activity, e.g. office work
 * periodic disturbance activity, e.g. industrial use or vehicular movement
 * high disturbance activity, e.g. a fire door containing asbestos-insulating boards which is in constant use

The HSE uses a priority scoring tool which combines assessment of the material containing asbestos and the disturbance risk.

The outcome of the risk assessment will identify priorities for management of the locations and materials containing asbestos, for example areas which require urgent attention, materials which are not suited to any form of containment may need to be removed or encased, minor repairs may be needed, or labelling and provision of information may be sufficient to ensure that significant health risks can be avoided, e.g. for a little-used store room it may be sufficient to keep the door locked and attach a warning notice to the door.

The HSE points out that "Regulation 4 is a duty to manage, not [just] a duty to survey".

The removal of high-risk asbestos products from non-domestic properties is tightly controlled by the HSE and high-risk products such as thermal insulation must be removed under controlled conditions by licensed contractors. Further guidance on which products this applies to can be found on the HSE website along with a list of licensees.

The current regulations show that it is a legal requirement that all who may come across asbestos in their day-to-day work have been provided with the relevant asbestos training.

Bans
The manufacture and import of Blue and Brown Asbestos were banned in the United Kingdom in 1985 by The asbestos (Prohibitions) Regulations 1985. The use of White Asbestos was banned in England, Scotland and Wales in 1999 by The Asbestos (Prohibitions) (Amendment) Regulations 1999. Asbestos was banned in Northern Ireland in 2000 by the Asbestos (Prohibitions) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000.

United States
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has no general ban on the use of asbestos. However, asbestos was one of the first hazardous air pollutants regulated under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act of 1970, and many applications have been forbidden by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The United States has extensive laws regulating the use of asbestos at the federal, state, and local level.

Litigation
One of the major issues relating to asbestos in civil procedure is the latency of asbestos-related diseases. Most countries have limitation periods to bar actions that are taken long after the cause of action has lapsed. For example, in Malaysia the time period to file a tort action is six years from the time the tort occurred. Due to several asbestos-related actions, countries such as Australia have amended their laws relating to limitations to accumulate starting from time of discovery rather than time when the cause of action accrued.

The first employee claims for injury from exposure to asbestos in the workplace were made in 1927, and the first lawsuit against an asbestos manufacturer was filed in 1929. Since then, many lawsuits have been filed. As a result of the litigation, manufacturers sold off subsidiaries, diversified, produced asbestos substitutes, and started asbestos removal businesses.

Brazil
In June 2008, the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF) voted to maintain the law (12.684/07) which prohibits the use of any product which utilizes asbestos in São Paulo State. It was expected then the decision would be extended to include the whole country.

In August 2017, in what is known in Brazil as a "direct action for the declaration of unconstitutionality", an instrument to declare the unconstitutionality of law or federal norms, with respect to the current Constitution (the equivalent in the U.S. as a "judicial review"), the constitutionality of the prohibitive law of São Paulo was questioned. The Supreme Federal Court considered it constitutional and even incidentally declared the unconstitutionality of Art. 2 of Federal Law nº 9.055/95, that authorized the use of chrysotile asbestos in a controlled manner.

On November 29, 2017, the Supreme Federal Court prohibited the extraction, industrialization and commercialization of asbestos throughout the country.

South Africa
The Lubbe v Cape Plc case [2000] UKHL 41 is a conflict of laws case, which is also significant for the question of "lifting the corporate veil" in relation to tort victims. Mrs Lubbe was exposed to asbestos while working for a South African subsidiary company of the UK parent company, Cape plc.

The Richard Meeran-run Cape Plc case was settled in 2003.

The Richard Spoor-run Gencor case was settled in 2003.

400 Swaziland ARD victims from the Havelock mine

The Havelock chrysotile mine cases were suspended in 2003 because Turner and Newall, the company that owned the mine, had filed for bankruptcy in 2001. Swiss Eternit Group

This was a voluntary agreement which was reached in 2006. The agreement enabled ex-miners of the Kuruman and Danielskuil Cape Blue Asbestos (KCBA and DCBA) mines in the Northern Cape province to apply under similar conditions as the open settlement of the ART. The Kgalagadi Relief Trust (KRT) was thus created. The terms of the trust are not clarified however in practice R136 million was paid over for compensation purposes, for payouts until 2026. The trustees of the KRT requested the ART to administer the KRT settlement as the two trusts were very similarly structured.

Seventy-five percent of the claimants in the Cape Plc case came from Limpopo province and the remaining twenty-five percent from the Prieska Koegas area in the Northern Cape province. The majority of the claimants in the ART settlement (around 78%) were exposed in the Kuruman area in the Northern Cape province, with the balance exposed at Penge in Limpopo province and Msauli in Mpumalanga province, which were equally proportioned.

Statistically, mesothelioma and asbestos related lung cancer sufferers receiving the highest payments of R71,500 each. Due to Gencor's significant contribution settlements, it was prohibited for those who had received compensation under the Cape agreement to later be paid by the ART, even if the worker had worked on the Kuruman or Penge mines when under Gencor control.

Relief trusts
In 2006, Cape plc started a trust to compensate those who have suffered from asbestos related diseases as a result of Cape's historical activities. To date, this Trust has paid out over £30m to those who have become sick or to their dependents. The Scheme of Arrangement was approved by the High Court and is separately funded. Its funds being administered by two independent trustees.

Asbestos Relief Trust (ART) is regarded as a model of efficient occupational disease compensation in South Africa. Gencor was a major contributor to the Richard Meeran-run Cape Plc case and the Richard Spoor-run Gencor case. Glencor provided 29% of the R138 million that went to the Cape Plc's set of claimants, and 96% of the R381 million that formed the ART. An additional sum of R35 million went to environmental rehabilitation, and about R20 million was added to the ART to contribute to supplementary and additional payments. After some time and publicity claims against The Cape Plc list had grown from 2 000 in January 1999 and to 7 500 in August 2001. The ART settlement was open, and made provision for compensation to any person who met the compensation criteria set out in the Trust deed, until the year 2028. Many companies agreed to compensate the workers which were exposed to asbestos in addition to the compensation payable under the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act (ODMWA) The settlement included environmentally expose victims of ARDS. This settlement model was achieved by personal communication, Georgina Jephson, attorney at Richard Spoor Inc. Attorneys.

The Trust provides compensation for people in these four categories related to Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARD) namely:

 * (ARD1)- asbestosis / pleural thickening with mild to moderate
 * (ARD2) -lung function impairment or with severe lung function impairment
 * (ARD3) -asbestos-related lung cancer
 * (ARD4) -mesothelioma

A model by the ART estimated that about 16 800 individuals would submit claims to the Trust, of which approximately 5 036 (30%) would be successful. This was subsequently revised to 5 162. Of these, 219 (4.2%) would be environmental claimants, 150 (2.9%) would have lung cancer and 556 (10.8%) would have mesothelioma; the balance would have asbestosis and/or pleural thickening. No definitive figures were provided for the expected ARD1/ ARD2 ratio. The amounts payable for compensation vary, but the average amount of compensation since 2003 has been about R40 000, R80 000, R170 000 and R350 000 for each of the categories ARD 1-4 described above. These amounts are paid over and above any compensation that the claimants might receive under the ODMWA. In order for a case to be compensable, a victim needs to show that he/she was both exposed to asbestos from one of the operations run by the funders of the ART, and has a compensable disease.

Health
A lack of facilities for terminally ill mesothelioma sufferers results in a larger burden of service, according to Sister Phemelo Magabanyane, a palliative care nurse who has cared for over 100 mesothelioma and lung cancer sufferers in the greater Kuruman district in the Northern Cape. Mesothelioma is a life-threatening cancer of the pleura or peritoneum which can be diagnosed up to 40 years after exposure to asbestos.

The aftermath
South Africa has the highest prevalence of mesothelioma in the world. Richard Spoor, a lawyer who represented the claimants against Gencor says: "The environmental scale of the disaster we are seeing unfold in the Northern Cape is on a level with the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl, in terms of impact, spread and longevity," he also says that children are particularly vulnerable to mesothelioma. Since September 2016, five of the 1 600 claimants he represents in the Northern Cape have died. Internationally renowned photographer David Goldblatt started photographing victims after a friend died of mesothelioma despite never being in close proximity to a mine. It has been reported that she picked up the disease from rubbing a blue asbestos rock ornament that she kept in her home.

United Kingdom
Guardian Unlimited reported a test-case ruling in 2005, that allowed thousands of workers to be compensated for pleural plaques. Diffuse or localised fibrosis of the pleura, or pleural plaques, is less serious than asbestosis or mesothelioma, but is also considered a disease closely linked to the inhalation of asbestos. However, insurers claimed the plaques are "simply a marker for asbestos exposure rather than an injury." Mr Justice Holland rejected the insurers' arguments, and counsel for workers hailed the decision as a "victory that puts people before profits." However this decision was reversed by the Court of Appeal. On 17 October 2007, the House of Lords confirmed the Court of Appeal's decision. Pleural plaques no longer constitute actionable injury in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Scottish government introduced legislation in 2009 to preserve the status of pleural plaques as an actionable injury in Scotland and there are proposals to introduce similar legislation in Northern Ireland.

Insurance companies allege that asbestos litigation has taken too heavy a toll on insurance and industry. A 2002 article in the British The Daily Telegraph's associate quoted Equitas, the  reinsurance vehicle which assumed Lloyd's of London's liabilities, which argued that asbestos claims were the "greatest single threat" to Lloyd's of London's existence. Of note is that Lloyd's of London had been sued for fraud by its investors, who claimed Lloyd's misrepresented pending losses from asbestos claims.

In May 2006, the House of Lords ruled that compensation for asbestos injuries should be reduced where responsibility could not be attached to a single employer. Critics, including trade unions, asbestos groups and Jim Wallace, former justice minister, have condemned the ruling. They said it overturned the traditional Scottish law to such cases, and was a breach of natural justice. As a result of this outcry, the ruling has been overturned by section three of the Compensation Act 2006.

In February 2010 a court ruling set a new precedent for asbestosis claims. The case, in which widow Della Sabin attempted to claim compensation following her husband's death from asbestosis, hinged on the issue of how many asbestos fibers must be present in the lungs for a claim to be valid. A research team based at Llandough Hospital initially reported that the minimum amount of fibers that needed to be present for a claim to be valid was 20 million (only 7 million were found in the sample taken from Mrs Sabin's husband Leslie). However, a subsequent US study suggested that, due to the fact that Leslie had lived for more than forty years after his exposure, a large number of fibers would have cleared from his body naturally; had he died twenty years earlier the asbestos count in his lungs would have been about 35 million fibers per gram. The judge preferred this evidence, and ruled in favor of Mrs Sabin.

Civil lawsuits
Litigation related to asbestos injuries and property damages has been claimed to be the longest-running mass tort in U.S. history, involving more than 8,000 defendants and 700,000 claimants. Since asbestos-related disease has been identified by the medical profession in the late 1920s, workers' compensation cases were filed and resolved in secrecy, with a flood of litigation starting in the United States in the 1970s, and culminating in the 1980s and 1990s. Current trends indicate that the rate at which people are diagnosed with asbsestos-related disease will likely increase through the next decade. Analysts have estimated that the total costs of asbestos litigation in the USA alone will eventually reach $200 to $275 billion. The amounts and method of allocating compensation have been the source of many court cases, and government attempts at resolution of existing and future cases. A multi-district litigation (MDL) complex filing has remained pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for over 20 years. As many of the scarring-related injury cases have been resolved, asbestos litigation continues to be hard-fought among the litigants, mainly in individually brought cases for terminal cases of asbestosis, mesothelioma, and other cancers.

In June 1982, a retired boilermaker, James Cavett, won an award of $2.3 million compensatory and $1.5 million in punitive damages against Johns-Manville. The Manville Corporation, formerly the Johns-Manville Corporation, filed for reorganization and protection under the United States Bankruptcy Code in August 1982. At the time, it was the largest company ever to file bankruptcy, and was one of the richest. Manville was then 181st on the Fortune 500, but was the defendant of 16,500 lawsuits related to the health effects of asbestos. The company was described by Ron Motley, a South Carolina attorney, as "the greatest corporate mass murderer in history." Court documents show that the corporation had a long history of hiding evidence of the ill effects of asbestos from its workers and the public.

By the early 1990s, "more than half of the 25 largest asbestos manufacturers in the US, including Amatex, Carey-Canada, Celotex, Eagle-Picher, Forty-Eight Insulations, Manville Corporation, National Gypsum, Standard Insulation, Unarco, and UNR Industries had declared bankruptcy. Filing for bankruptcy protects a company from its creditors."

Asbestos-related cases increased on the U.S. Supreme Court docket after 1980 and the court has dealt with several asbestos-related cases since 1986. Two large class action settlements, designed to limit liability, came before the court in 1997 and 1999. Both settlements were ultimately rejected by the court because they would exclude future claimants, or those who later developed asbestos-related illnesses. These rulings addressed the 20-50 year latency period of serious asbestos-related illnesses.

In 1988, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued regulations requiring certain U.S. companies to report the asbestos used in their products.

Several legislative remedies have been considered by the U.S. Congress but each time rejected for a variety of reasons. In 2005, Congress considered but did not pass legislation entitled the "Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005". The act would have established a $140 billion trust fund in lieu of litigation, but as it would have proactively taken funds held in reserve by bankruptcy trusts, manufacturers and insurance companies, it was not widely supported either by victims or corporations.

On April 26, 2005, Dr. Philip J. Landrigan, professor and chair of the Department of Community and Preventive Medicine at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City, testified before the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary against this proposed legislation. He testified that many of the bill's provisions were unsupported by medicine and would unfairly exclude a large number of people who had become ill or died from asbestos: "The approach to the diagnosis of disease caused by asbestos that is set forth in this bill is not consistent with the diagnostic criteria established by the American Thoracic Society. If the bill is to deliver on its promise of fairness, these criteria will need to be revised." Also opposing the bill were the American Public Health Association and the Asbestos Workers' Union.

On June 14, 2006, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved an amendment to the act which would have allowed victims of mesothelioma $1.1M within 30 days of their claim's approval. This version would have also expanded eligible claimants to people exposed to asbestos from the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, and to construction debris in hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Ultimately, the bill's reliance on funding from private entities large and small, as well as debate over a sunset provision and the impact on the U.S. budgetary process caused the bill to fail to leave committee.

Since the bankruptcy filing of Johns-Manville in 1984, many U.S. and U.K. asbestos manufacturers have escaped litigation by filing bankruptcy. Once in bankruptcy, these companies typically are required to fund special "bankruptcy trusts" that pay pennies on the dollar to injured parties. However, these trusts do permit larger numbers of claimants to receive some kind of compensation, even if greatly reduced from potential recoveries in the tort system.

Since 2002, asbestos lawsuits in the U.S. have included the following as defendants:
 * 1) Manufacturers of machinery that are alleged to have required asbestos-containing parts to function properly;
 * 2) Owners of premises at which asbestos-containing products were installed (which includes virtually anyone who owned a building prior to 1980);
 * 3) Banks that financed ships or buildings where asbestos was installed (on the grounds that no rational lender would take a security interest in an asset without studying the risks involved);
 * 4) Retailers of asbestos-containing products (including hardware, home improvement and automotive parts stores);
 * 5) Corporations that allegedly conspired with asbestos manufacturers to deliberately conceal the dangers of asbestos (e.g., MetLife, a well-known insurance company which worked with Johns-Manville);
 * 6) Manufacturers of tools which were used to cut or shape asbestos-containing parts; and
 * 7) Manufacturers of respiratory protective equipment.

Defendants in the first category have contested liability on the grounds that nearly all of them either did not ship asbestos-containing parts with their products at all (that is, asbestos was installed only by end users) or did not sell replacement parts for their own products (in cases where the plaintiff was allegedly exposed well after any factory-original asbestos-containing parts would have been replaced), and either way cannot be responsible for toxic third-party parts that they did not manufacture, distribute, or sell. In 2008, the Washington Supreme Court, the first to reach the issue, decided in favor of the defense. On January 12, 2012, the Supreme Court of California also decided in favor of the defense in O'Neil v. Crane Co. This is significant as a 2007 study found that California and Washington were the two most influential state supreme courts in the United States in the period from 1940 to 2005.

In a decision from January 2014, Gray v. Garlock Sealing Technologies had entered into bankruptcy proceedings, and discovery in the case uncovered evidence of fraud that led to a reduction in estimated future liability to a tenth of what was estimated.

Some defendants raise what is sometimes called the chrysotile-defense, under which manufacturers of some products containing only chrysotile fibers claim that these are not as harmful as amphibole-containing products. As 95% of the products used in the United States historically were mostly chrysotile, this claim is widely disputed by health officials and medical professionals. The World Health Organization recognizes that exposure to all types of asbestos fibers, including chrysotile, can cause cancer of the lung, larynx, and ovary, mesothelioma, and asbestosis.

Adamo Wrecking Company
On February 20, 1973, a federal grand jury in Detroit, Michigan, indicted Adamo Wrecking Company for violating provisions of the Clean Air Act by knowingly causing the emission of asbestos by failure to wet and remove friable asbestos materials from demolitions.

Adamo was one of a number of demolition contractors indicted throughout the country for the alleged violation of the Clean Air Act. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan dismissed the criminal indictment on the ground that it was not an "emission standard," but a "work practice standard," which under the terms of the statute, did not carry criminal liability.

The government appealed and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the trial court, stating that it erred in determining that it had jurisdiction to review the validity of the standard in a criminal proceeding. Adamo's attorneys appealed to the Supreme Court.

On January 10, 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Adamo when it held that the trial court did have jurisdiction to review the standard in a criminal proceeding and also agreed with the trial court that the requirements in the act were "not standards" but "procedures" and therefore the proceedings were properly dismissed.

W. R. Grace and Company
A federal grand jury indicted W. R. Grace and Company and seven top executives on February 5, 2005, for its operations of a vermiculite mine in Libby, Montana. The indictment accused Grace of wire fraud, knowing endangerment of residents by concealing air monitoring results, obstruction of justice by interfering with an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) investigation, violation of the Clean Air Act, providing asbestos materials to schools and local residents, and conspiracy to release asbestos and cover up health problems from asbestos contamination. According to the Baltimore Sun the Department of Justice said 1,200 residents had developed asbestos-related diseases and some had died, and there could be many more injuries and deaths.

According to the Baltimore Sun W. R. Grace and Company faced fines of up to $280 million for polluting the town of Libby, Montana. Libby was declared a Superfund disaster area in 2002, and the EPA has spent $54 million in cleanup. Grace was ordered by a court to reimburse the EPA for cleanup costs, but the bankruptcy court must approve any payments.

On June 8, 2006, a federal judge dismissed the conspiracy charge of "knowing endangerment" because some of the defendant officials had left the company before the five-year statute of limitations had begun to run. The wire fraud charge was dropped by prosecutors in March.

Unsafe abatement
Asbestos abatement (removal of asbestos) has become a thriving industry in the United States. Strict removal and disposal laws have been enacted to protect the public from airborne asbestos. The Clean Air Act requires that asbestos be wetted during removal and strictly contained, and that workers wear safety gear and masks. The federal government has prosecuted dozens of violations of the act and violations of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) related to the operations. Often these involve contractors who hire undocumented workers without proper training or protection to illegally remove asbestos.

On April 2, 1998, three men were indicted in a conspiracy to use homeless men for illegal asbestos removal from an aging Wisconsin manufacturing plant. Then-US Attorney General Janet Reno said, "Knowingly removing asbestos improperly is criminal. Exploiting the homeless to do this work is cruel."

On December 12, 2004, owners of New York asbestos abatement companies were sentenced to the longest federal jail sentences for environmental crimes in U.S. history, after they were convicted on 18 counts of conspiracy to violate the Clean Air Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act, and actual violations of the Clean Air Act and Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The crimes involved a 10-year scheme to illegally remove asbestos. The RICO counts included obstruction of justice, money laundering, mail fraud and bid rigging, all related to the asbestos cleanup.

On January 11, 2006, San Diego Gas & Electric Co., two of its employees, and a contractor were indicted by a federal grand jury on charges that they violated safety standards while removing asbestos from pipes in Lemon Grove, California. The defendants were charged with five counts of conspiracy, violating asbestos work practice standards and making false statements.

title: Asbestos and the law


text:
Opiate (disambiguation)

An opiate is any of the narcotic alkaloids found in opium.

Opiate may also refer to:

 * Opiate, an alias of Danish musician and producer Thomas Knak
 * Opiate (EP), an EP by progressive rock band Tool
 * "Opiate" (song), a song and title track by Tool
 * "Opiate Float", a song by Nebula from their 2006 album Apollo
 * "Opiated", a song by The Tragically Hip from the album Up to Here

title: Opiate (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:Former Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia

editprotected Double redirect, should point to Macedonia QueenCake (talk) 16:58, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

 * ✅ Amalthea  17:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 15 February 2019
The Republic of Macedonia has been moved with overwhelming consensus to North Macedonia. Requesting that the redirect is updated to North Macedonia to reflect this change. ✿ SilentResident ✿ (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 12:23, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC)


text: User talk:69.30.146.136

title: User talk:69.30.146.136


text: User talk:69.156.152.72

title: User talk:69.156.152.72