text:
Mexico–United States border

The Mexico–United States border (frontera Estados Unidos–México) is an international border separating Mexico and the United States, extending from the Pacific Ocean in the west to the Gulf of Mexico in the east. It traverses a variety of terrains, ranging from urban areas to deserts. The Mexico–U.S. border is the most frequently crossed border in the world with approximately 350 million documented crossings annually. Illegal crossing of the border to enter the United States has caused the Mexico–United States border crisis. It is one of two international borders that the United States has, the other being the northern Canada–United States border; Mexico has two other borders: with Belize and with Guatemala. The Mexico-U.S. border is the tenth-longest border between two countries in the world.

The total length of the continental border is 3,145 km. From the Gulf of Mexico, it follows the course of the Rio Grande (Río Bravo del Norte) to the border crossing at Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, and El Paso, Texas. Westward from El Paso–Juárez, it crosses vast tracts of the Chihuahuan and Sonoran deserts to the Colorado River Delta and San Diego–Tijuana, before reaching the Pacific Ocean.

Four American states border Mexico: California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. One definition of Northern Mexico includes only the six Mexican states that border the U.S.: Baja California, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León, Sonora and Tamaulipas.

Geography

The Mexico–United States border extends 3,145 km, in addition to the maritime boundaries of 29 km into the Pacific Ocean and 19 km into the Gulf of Mexico. It is the tenth-longest border between two countries in the world.

The Mexico–U.S. border begins at the Initial Point of Boundary Between U.S. and Mexico, which is set one marine league (three nautical miles) south of the southernmost point of San Diego Bay. The border then proceeds for 227 km in a straight line towards the confluence of the Colorado River and Gila River. The border continues southwards along the Colorado River for 39 km, until it reaches a point 20. mi south of the Gila River confluence. The border then follows a series of lines and parallels totaling 859 km. First, it follows a straight line from the Colorado River to the intersection of the 31° 20′ parallel north and the 111th meridian west. It then proceeds eastwards along the 31° 20′ parallel north up to a meridian 100. mi west of the point where the Rio Grande crosses the 31° 47′ parallel north, It then proceeds northwards along that meridian up to the 31° 47′ parallel north and then eastwards along that parallel until it meets the Rio Grande.

According to the International Boundary and Water Commission, the continental border then follows the middle of the Rio Grande—according to the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo between the two nations, "along the deepest channel" (also known as the thalweg)—a distance of 2,020. km to its mouth at the Gulf of Mexico. The Rio Grande frequently meanders along the Texas–Mexico border. As a result, the U.S. and Mexico have a treaty by which the Rio Grande is maintained as the border, with new cut-offs and islands being transferred to the other nation as necessary. The Boundary Treaty of 1970 between Mexico and the U.S. settled all outstanding boundary disputes and uncertainties related to the Rio Grande border.

The U.S. states along the border, from west to east, are California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. The Mexican states along the border are Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León, and Tamaulipas. Among the U.S. states, Texas has the longest stretch of the border with Mexico, while California has the shortest. Among the states in Mexico, Chihuahua has the longest border with the U.S., while Nuevo León has the shortest. Along the border are 23 U.S. counties and 39 Mexican municipalities.

Prior to the Mexican–American War

In the mid-16th century, after the discovery of silver, settlers from various countries and backgrounds began to arrive in the area. This period of sparse settlement included colonizers from different backgrounds. The area was part of New Spain. In the early 19th century, the U.S. bought the lands known as the Louisiana Purchase from France and began to expand steadily westward.

After the 1803 Louisiana Purchase, the border between the U.S. and New Spain was not clearly defined. The border was established in the 1819 Adams–Onís Treaty between the U.S. and Spain, which specified a border in the vicinity of the western edge of the Mississippi River watershed. Mexico gained its independence from Spain, and the border was reaffirmed in the 1828 Treaty of Limits.

Mexico attempted to create a buffer zone at the border that would prevent possible invasion from the north. The Mexican government encouraged thousands of their own citizens to settle in the region that is now known as Texas and even offered inexpensive land to settlers from the U.S. in exchange for populating the area. The influx of people did not provide the defense that Mexico had hoped for and instead Texas declared its independence in 1836, which lasted until 1845 when the U.S. annexed it.

Establishment of current border
The constant conflicts in the Texas region in the mid-19th century eventually led to the Mexican–American War, which began in 1846 and ended in 1848 with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. In the terms of the peace treaty, Mexico lost more than 2,500,000 sqkm of land, 55% of its territory, including all of what is today California, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada and parts of what is Colorado, Wyoming, Kansas, and Oklahoma. In addition, all disputes over Texas and the disputed territory between Rio Grande and Rio Nueces were abandoned.

Five years later, the Gadsden Purchase completed the creation of the current U.S.–Mexico border. The purchase was initially to accommodate a planned railway right-of-way. These purchases left approximately 300,000 people living in the once disputed lands, many of whom were Mexican nationals. Following the establishment of the current border, several towns sprang up along this boundary, and many of the Mexican citizens were given free land in the northern regions of Mexico in exchange for returning and repopulating the area.

Later history

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and another treaty in 1884 were the agreements originally responsible for the settlement of the international border, both of which specified that the middle of the Rio Grande was the border, irrespective of any alterations in the channels or banks. The Rio Grande shifted south between 1852 and 1868, with the most radical shift in the river occurring after a flood in 1864. By 1873 the moving river-center border had cut off approximately 2.4 km2 of Mexican territory in the El Paso-Juarez area, in effect transferring the land to the U.S.. By a treaty negotiated in 1963, Mexico regained most of this land in what became known as the Chamizal dispute and transferred 1.07 km2 in return to the U.S. Border treaties are jointly administered by the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), which was established in 1889 to maintain the border, allocate river waters between the two nations, and provide for flood control and water sanitation. Once viewed as a model of international cooperation, in recent decades the IBWC has been heavily criticized as an institutional anachronism, by-passed by modern social, environmental and political issues. In particular, jurisdictional issues regarding water rights in the Rio Grande Valley have continued to cause tension between farmers along the border, according to Mexican political scientist Armand Peschard-Sverdrup.

The economic development of the border region on the Mexican side of the border depended largely on its proximity to the U.S., because of its remoteness from commercial centers in Mexico. During the years of Mexican President Porfirio Díaz, between 1876 and 1910, the border communities boomed because of close ties to the U.S. and the Mexican government's support for financial investments from the U.S. Railroads were built that connected the northern Mexican states more to the U.S. than to Mexico, and the population grew tremendously. The mining industry also developed, as did the U.S.'s control of it. By the early 20th century companies from the U.S. controlled 81% of the mining industry and had invested US$500 million in the Mexican economy overall, 25% of it in the border regions.

The U.S. Immigration Act of 1891 authorized the implementation of inspection stations at ports of entry along the Mexican and Canadian borders. The U.S. Immigration Act of 1917 required the passing of a literacy test and a head tax by Mexicans wanting to enter the U.S. legally; however, during World War I, when labor shortages grew, the provisions were temporarily suspended. The U.S. Immigration Act of 1924 established the U.S. Border Patrol.

The Mexican Revolution, caused at least partially by animosity toward foreign ownership of Mexican properties, began in 1910. The revolution increased the political instability in Mexico but did not significantly slow U.S. investment. It did reduce economic development within Mexico, however, and the border regions reflected this. As the infrastructure of communities on the U.S. side continued to improve, the Mexican side began to fall behind in the construction and maintenance of important transportation networks and systems necessary to municipal development.

Although the Mexican Revolution caused insecurity in Mexico, it also strained U.S.–Mexico relations. With the Mexican Revolution lasting for 10 years, ending in 1920, and World War I simultaneously occurring between 1914 and 1918, the division between the U.S. and Mexico began to polarize the two nations. Constant battles and raids along the border made both authorities nervous about borderland security. The Zimmerman Telegram, a diplomatic cable sent by Germany but intercepted and decrypted by British intelligence, was meant to bait Mexico into war with the U.S. in order to reconquer what was taken from them during the Mexican-American War. This inspired the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation to monitor suspicious activities and potential violence at the border. Within 10 years, frequent provocations caused border towns to transform into battlefields, which intensified transborder restrictions, brought federal soldiers to patrol the border, and caused the construction of fences and barriers between border towns. When the battles concluded, restrictions for crossing the border were relaxed and most soldiers were sent home; however, the fences remained as a physical reminder of the division between the two nations. As years passed, more fences and higher barriers were established as attentions focused on the boundary demarcation between the U.S. and Mexico.

The first international bridge was the Brownsville & Matamoros International Bridge built in 1910. The first barrier built by the U.S. was between 1909 and 1911 in California, the first barrier built by Mexico was likely in 1918; barriers were extended in the 1920s and 1940s.

The Banco Convention of 1905 between the U.S. and Mexico allowed, in the event of sudden changes in the course of the Rio Grande (as by flooding), for the border to be altered to follow the new course. The sudden changes often created bancos (land surrounded by bends in the river that became segregated from either country by a cutoff, often caused by rapid accretion or avulsion of the alluvial channel), especially in the lower Rio Grande Valley. When these bancos are created, the International Boundary and Water Commission investigates if land previously belonging to the U.S. or Mexico is to be considered on the other side of the border. In all cases of these adjustments along the Rio Grande under the 1905 convention, which occurred on 37 different dates from 1910 to 1976, the transferred land was small (ranging from one to 646 acres) and uninhabited.

The Rio Grande Rectification Treaty of 1933 straightened and stabilized the river boundary through the highly developed El Paso-Juárez valley. Numerous parcels of land were transferred between the two countries during the construction period, 1935–1938. At the end, each nation had ceded an equal area of land to the other.

The Boundary Treaty of 1970 transferred an area of Mexican territory to the U.S., near Presidio and Hidalgo, Texas, to build flood control channels. In exchange, the U.S. ceded other land to Mexico, including five parcels near Presidio, the Horcon Tract and Beaver Island near Roma, Texas. On November 24, 2009, the U.S. ceded 6 islands in the Rio Grande to Mexico. At the same time, Mexico ceded 3 islands and 2 bancos to the U.S. This transfer, which had been pending for 20 years, was the first application of Article III of the 1970 Boundary Treaty.

On March 27, 2023, at least 38 detained migrants (mostly from Central America) were killed—and dozens more injured—in a fire started in protest inside a locked and crowded detention center cell in northern Mexico, with motives ranging from pending deportation to overcrowding and lack of access to drinking water.

Border crossing checkpoints
The border separating Mexico and the U.S. is the most frequently crossed international boundary in the world, with approximately 350 million legal crossings taking place annually.

Border crossings take place by roads, pedestrian walkways, railroads and ferries. From west to east, below is a list of the border city "twinnings"; cross-border municipalities connected by one or more legal border crossings.

 * San Diego, California (San Ysidro) – Tijuana, Baja California (San Diego–Tijuana Metro)
 * Cross Border Xpress, Otay Mesa, California – Tijuana International Airport, Baja California
 * Otay Mesa, California – Tijuana, Baja California
 * Tecate, California – Tecate, Baja California
 * Calexico, California – Mexicali, Baja California
 * Andrade, California – Los Algodones, Baja California
 * San Luis, Arizona – San Luis Río Colorado, Sonora
 * Lukeville, Arizona – Sonoyta, Sonora
 * Sasabe, Arizona – Altar, Sonora
 * Nogales, Arizona – Nogales, Sonora
 * Naco, Arizona – Naco, Sonora
 * Douglas, Arizona – Agua Prieta, Sonora
 * Antelope Wells, New Mexico – El Berrendo, Chihuahua
 * Columbus, New Mexico – Palomas, Chihuahua
 * Santa Teresa, New Mexico – San Jerónimo, Chihuahua
 * El Paso, Texas – Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua (El Paso-Juarez)
 * Fabens, Texas – Práxedis G. Guerrero, Chihuahua municipality
 * Fort Hancock, Texas – El Porvenir, Chihuahua
 * Presidio, Texas – Ojinaga, Chihuahua
 * Heath Canyon, Texas – La Linda, Coahuila (closed)
 * Del Rio, Texas – Ciudad Acuña, Coahuila
 * Eagle Pass, Texas – Piedras Negras, Coahuila
 * Laredo, Texas – Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas
 * Laredo, Texas – Colombia, Nuevo León
 * Falcon Heights, Texas – Presa Falcón, Tamaulipas
 * Roma, Texas – Ciudad Miguel Alemán, Tamaulipas
 * Rio Grande City, Texas – Ciudad Camargo, Tamaulipas
 * Los Ebanos, Texas – Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, Tamaulipas
 * Mission, Texas – Reynosa, Tamaulipas
 * Hidalgo, Texas – Reynosa, Tamaulipas
 * Pharr, Texas – Reynosa, Tamaulipas
 * Donna, Texas – Rio Bravo, Tamaulipas
 * Progreso, Texas – Nuevo Progreso, Tamaulipas
 * Los Indios, Texas – Matamoros, Tamaulipas
 * Brownsville, Texas – Matamoros, Tamaulipas

The total population of the borderlands—defined as those counties and municipios lining the border on either side—stands at some 12 million people.

Tijuana-San Ysidro border

The San Ysidro Port of Entry is located between San Ysidro, California and Tijuana, Baja California. Approximately 50,000 vehicles and 25,000 pedestrians use this entry daily. In the U.S., I-5 crosses directly to Tijuana, and the highway's southern terminus is this crossing. In 2005, more than 17 million vehicles and 50 million people entered the U.S. through San Ysidro. Among those who enter the U.S. through San Ysidro are transfronterizos, American citizens who live in Mexico and attend school in the U.S.

It has influenced the every day lifestyle of people that live in these border towns. Along the coast of Baja California, there are neighborhoods of Americans living in Tijuana, Rosarito Beach, and Ensenada, whose residents commute to the U.S. daily to work. Additionally, many Mexicans also enter the U.S. to commute daily to work. In 1999, 7.6% of the labor force of Tijuana was employed in San Diego.

The average wait time to cross into the U.S. is approximately an hour. The thousands of vehicles that transit through the border every day is causing air pollution in San Ysidro and Tijuana. The emission of carbon monoxide (CO) and other vehicle related air contaminants have been linked to health complications such as cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, birth outcomes, premature death, obesity, asthma and other respiratory diseases. The high levels of traffic collusion and the extended wait times has affected the mental health, stress levels, and aggressive behavior of the people who cross frequently. The San Ysidro border is heavily policed, separated by three walls, border patrol agents and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Tijuana is the next target for San Diegan developers because of its fast-growing economy, lower cost of living, cheap prices and proximity to San Diego. While this would benefit the tourist aspect of the city, it is damaging to low-income residents that will no longer be able to afford the cost of living in Tijuana. Tijuana is home to many deportees from the U.S., many who have lost everything and do not have an income to rely on and are now in a new city in which they have to quickly adapt in order to survive. San Diego developers would bring many benefits to Tijuana, but deportees and the poor run the risk of being impacted by the gentrification of Tijuana.

Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative
In late 2006, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a rule regarding new identification requirements for U.S. citizens and international travelers entering the U.S. implemented on January 23, 2007. This final rule and first phase of the WHTI specifies nine forms of identification, one of which is required to enter the U.S. by air: a valid passport; a passport card; a state enhanced driver's license or state enhanced non-driver ID card (available in Michigan, New York, Vermont, and Washington ) approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security; a trusted traveler program card (Global Entry, NEXUS, FAST, or SENTRI); an enhanced tribal identification card; a Native American Tribal Photo Identification Card; Form I-872 – American Indian Card; a valid Merchant Mariner Document when traveling in conjunction with official maritime business; or a valid U.S. military identification card when traveling on official orders.

In August 2015, Mexico began enforcing a rule that all foreign citizens that plan to stay in the country for more than seven days or are travelling on business will have to pay a 330 pesos ($21) fee and show their passport.

Veterinary inspections
When animals are imported from one country to another, there is the possibility that diseases and parasites can move with them. Thus, most countries impose animal health regulations on the import of animals. Most animals imported to the U.S. must be accompanied by import permits obtained in advance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and/or health certification papers from the country of origin.

Veterinary inspections are often required, and are available only at designated ports; advance contact with port veterinarians is recommended. Animals crossing the U.S.–Mexico border may have a country of origin other than the country where they present for inspection. Such animals include those from the U.S. that cross to Mexico and return, and animals from other countries that travel overland through Mexico or the U.S. before crossing the border.

APHIS imposes precautions to keep out several equine diseases, including glanders, dourine, equine infectious anemia, equine piroplasmosis, Venezuelan equine encephalitis, and contagious equine metritis. APHIS also checks horses to prevent the introduction of ticks and other parasites. In the Lower Rio Grande Valley, U.S. Department of Agriculture inspectors look for horses and livestock that stray across the border carrying ticks. These animals are often called wetstock, and the inspectors are referred to as tickriders.

Per APHIS, horses originating from Canada can enter the U.S. with a Canadian government veterinary health certificate and a negative test for EIA. Horses from Mexico must have a health certificate; pass negative tests for EIA, dourine, glanders, and EP at a USDA import center; and undergo precautionary treatments for external parasites at the port of entry. Horses from other Western Hemisphere countries must have the same tests as those from Mexico and, except for horses from Argentina, must be held in quarantine for at least seven days as a check for VEE.

APHIS imposes similar testing and certification requirements on horses from other parts of the world but without the quarantine for VEE. These horses are held in quarantine—usually three days—or until tests are completed. Because the disease equine piroplasmosis (equine babesiosis) is endemic in Mexico but not established in the U.S., transportation of horses from Mexico to the U.S. requires evaluation of horses for the presence of this disease. A leading exception to this rule is the special waiver obtained by riders participating in the Cabalgata Binacional Villista (see cavalcade).

Import from the U.S. to Mexico requires evidence within the prior 45 days of freedom from EIA, among other requirements.

Background
Data from the U.S. Border Patrol Agency's 2010 annual report shows that among the total number of border crossings without documentation from various countries into the U.S., 90% were from Mexico alone. In addition, there are more than 6 million undocumented Mexican nationals residing in the U.S. The border has a very high rate of documented and undocumented migrant crossings every year. With such a high rate of people crossing annually to the U.S., the country has invested in several distinct security measures.

In 2010, President Barack Obama signed an appropriation bill which gave the Customs and Border Protection, specifically the Border Patrol, 600 million dollars to implement and improve security. The U.S. government has invested many millions of dollars on border security, although this has not stopped undocumented immigration in the U.S. In June 2018, the U.S. government announced installation of facial recognition system for monitoring immigrant activities.

Border enforcement
The Border Patrol was created in 1924 with its primary mission to detect and prevent the illegal entry of immigrants into the U.S. Together with other law enforcement officers, the Border Patrol maintains the U.S.' borderlands—regulating the flow of legal immigration and goods while patrolling for undocumented migrants and trafficking of people and contraband. The present strategy to enforce migration along the U.S.–Mexico border is by the means of "prevention through deterrence". Its primary goal is to completely prevent undocumented immigrants from entering the U.S. from Mexico rather than apprehending the unauthorized who are already in the country. As assertive as it was, "prevention through deterrence" was arguably unsuccessful, with a doubling in size of undocumented immigrants population during the two decades leading up to 2014.

In order to effectively enforce border protection, the U.S.' policies and regulations have looked to make border crossings more hazardous through the implementation of various operations, one of those being the "funnel effect". The tactic was meant to discourage migration from Mexico into the U.S. by forcing migrants to travel further around barriers where the terrain and weather are more risky, but the strategy was not as successful as initially planned. As a result, the effect funneled more immigrants to their death even with the assistance of coyotes (smugglers). Not only has this approach caused fatalities throughout the U.S.–Mexico border, but it has even stirred up a nuisance for documented immigrants and American citizens. There has been general concern about the Border Patrol and other agencies abusing their authority by racial profiling and conducting unwarranted searches outside the exception of the 25 mi border zone, but still within the 100. mi border zone.

In 2012, Border Patrol agents made over 364,000 arrests of people illegally entering the country. Considerable success has been achieved in restoring integrity and safety to the border, by putting in place a border-control strategy. These include Operation Gatekeeper in San Diego; Operation Hold the Line in El Paso; Operation Rio Grande in McAllen; Operation Safeguard in Tucson; and the Arizona Border Control Initiative along the Arizona border.

According to Vulliamy, one in five Mexican nationals will visit or work in the U.S. at one point in their lifetime. As of 2010, the border is guarded by more than 20,000 Border Patrol agents, more than at any time in its history. The border is paralleled by U.S. Border Patrol interior checkpoints on major roads generally between 25 and 75 mi from the U.S. side of the border, and garitas generally within 50. km of the border on the Mexican side.

There are an estimated half a million illegal entries into the U.S. each year. Border Patrol activity is concentrated around border cities such as San Diego and El Paso which have extensive border fencing. This means that the flow of illegal immigrants is diverted into rural mountainous and desert areas, leading to several hundred migrant deaths along the Mexico–U.S. border of those attempting to cross into the U.S. from Mexico illegally and vice versa.

Undocumented labor contributes $395 billion to the economy every year. While the U.S. is in favor of immigration, the increase in undocumented immigration has given border-crossing a negative image. There are around 11.5 million undocumented workers in the U.S. today, and 87% of undocumented immigrants have been living in the U.S. for more than 7 years. Local economies that develop on the Mexican side capitalize not only on available skills but also on available, usually discarded, materials. Small businesses trade in clothes that are purchased by the pound and cardboard from the U.S. Some items, like the used tires found everywhere along the border, are made into certain items that support local economies and define a border.

The Secure Fence Act of 2006 was passed providing for the construction of 700. mi of high-security fencing. Attempts to complete the construction of the Mexico–United States barrier have been challenged by the Mexican government and various U.S.–based organizations.

In January 2013, the Government Accountability Office released a report stating that the U.S. Border Patrol intercepted 61% of individuals illegally crossing the border in 2011, which translates to 208,813 individuals not apprehended. 85,827 of the 208,813 would go on to illegally enter the U.S., while the rest returned to Mexico and other Central American countries. The report also shows that the number of illegal border crossings has dropped.

The apprehensions per (fiscal) year are shown in the graph; they reached a maximum of over 1.643 million in the year 2000. Similar numbers had been reached in 1986 with over 1.615 million.

The increase of border security throughout the years has progressively made crossings at the U.S.–Mexico border more dangerous, which has developed a human rights crisis at the border. The number of migrant deaths occurring along the U.S.–Mexico border has dramatically increased since the implementation of the funnel effect. Along the Arizona-Mexico border, only seven migrant deaths were recorded in 1996; however, the remains of over 2,000 migrants were discovered from 2001 to 2012. Since the majority of deaths occur in rural areas, where extreme temperatures are common, it is likely the number of recorded deaths are far below the total. Because of the harsh, inaccessible terrain, human remains may not be found for years or ever.

The Human Rights Watch cited on April 22, 2020, that a U.S.–Mexico border shutdown could be expected following the COVID-19 public health emergency. According to HRW, the new rule introduced by the CDC overlooks the fact that the U.S. is obligated to protect refugees from return to conditions threatening prosecution, as per treaties. President Joe Biden's border executive plan as the COVID-19 restrictions – known as Title 42 – expired in May 2023. Under Title 42, which had been in effect since March 2020, many border crossers have been quickly deported to Mexico without a chance for asylum.

Barrier
The U.S. government had plans in 2006, during the Bush administration, to erect a border fence along the Mexico–U.S. border. The controversial proposal included creating many individual fences. Almost 600. mi of fence were constructed, with each of the individual fences composed of steel and concrete. In between these fences are infrared cameras and sensors, National Guard soldiers, and SWAT teams on alert, giving rise to the term "virtual fence". Construction on the fence began in 2006, with each mile costing the U.S. government about $2.8 million. In 2010, the initiative was terminated because of costs, after having completed 640. mi of either barrier fence or vehicle barriers, that were either new or had been rebuilt over older, inferior fencing. The Boeing-built SBI-net systems of using radar, watchtowers, and sensors (without a fence or physical barrier) were scrapped for being over budget, full of glitches, and far behind schedule.

Border incursions
According to the U.S. Border Patrol, apprehensions of Central Americans at the border reduced from 70,000 to 55,000 attempted illegal migrants from 2007 to 2011. Thereafter, the number of apprehensions increased dramatically to 95,000 in 2012, 150,000 in 2013 and 220,000 in 2014. The increased apprehensions could have been the result of improved border security or a dramatic rise in attempted crossings, or both.

In the fiscal year of 2006, there were 29 confirmed border incursions by Mexican government officials, of which 17 were by armed individuals. Since 1996, there have been 253 incursions by Mexican government officials. In 2014 the U.S. Department of Homeland Security informed California Representative Duncan D. Hunter that since 2004, there have been 300 documented border incursions, which resulted in 131 individuals being detained.

On August 3, 2008, Mexican military personnel crossed into Arizona from Mexico and encountered a U.S. Border Patrol agent, whom they held at gunpoint. The soldiers later returned to Mexico, as backup Border Patrol agents came to investigate.

Disagreements over need for more resources
Proponents of greater spending on the border argue that continuing the buildup is necessary because of increased violence and drug trafficking from Mexico spilling into the U.S. However, critics such as the Washington Office on Latin America have argued that the diminishing number of border crossings can only be partially attributed to U.S. security measures. Unintentional factors, such as a weakened U.S. economy in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and the Mexican drug war have made attempting illegal border crossings more risky and less rewarding.

In 2019, there have been humanitarian crises on the border because of lack of resources. Migrant children have specifically been affected. Democratic members of the House of Representatives introduced legislation that would aid the humanitarian crisis by giving $4.5 billion to emergency spending to address the humanitarian crisis at the border, with significant funding for priorities including legal assistance, food, water, and medical services, support services for unaccompanied children, alternatives to detention, and refugee services.

Distribution of natural resources across the border has also been a major challenge, particularly for water use and water quality. Toxic sewage flowing into Mexico, and over-consumption of water from the Colorado River Basin and middle-lower Rio Grande have been central to the conflict. Large-scale infrastructure investments may be necessary to address the growing water and energy issues in this arid region.

Trump administration
In 2016, Republican nominee for president Donald Trump proposed building a border wall to control immigration. He declared that, as president, he would force Mexico to pay all costs. On January 25, 2017, several days after his inauguration and two days in advance of a planned meeting in Washington, D.C., with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, new U.S. president Trump signed Executive Order 13767 to enable the building of the wall. Peña Nieto denied that Mexico would pay for the wall and declined the meeting. Shortly after, Trump announced that he intended to impose a 20% tariff on Mexican goods. Mexico did not make any payments.

On September 20, 2017, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed a lawsuit alleging that the Trump administration has overstepped its powers in expediting construction of a border wall. As of the end of 2017, Mexico had not agreed to pay any amount toward the wall, no new tariffs on Mexican goods had been considered by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Congress had not appropriated funding for a wall, and no further wall construction had started beyond what was already planned during the Obama administration.

In June 2018, the Trump administration established a new policy of separating parents from their children at the Mexican border. People asking for asylum at official ports of entry were "being turned away and told there's no room for them now." The U.S. and Mexico mutually placed tariffs on each other's exports.

On November 8, 2018, the Trump administration announced new rules to deny asylum to anyone who crosses into the U.S. illegally from any nation, at Trump's discretion. This was based on the Supreme Court decision of Trump v. Hawaii and the presidential powers of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Trump signed a proclamation the next day to specify that people crossing the Mexican border illegally would not qualify for asylum; he called the march of migrants from Central America towards the U.S. a "crisis". Civil rights groups strongly criticized the move, and several groups, including the Southern Poverty Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Center for Constitutional Rights, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to challenge the proclamation. Judge Jon S. Tigar ruled in favor of the advocacy groups on November 20, 2018, placing an injunction on the administration to delay implementation of the rule. The administration appealed to the Ninth Circuit, where a divided 2-1 panel ruled that the new asylum rules were inconsistent with existing law and upheld the injunction. On December 21, 2018, the Supreme Court declined to hear the administration's challenge, leaving the injunction in place and preventing the asylum ban from being enforced.

During the 2018 fiscal year, U.S. border agents arrested 107,212 people traveling in families, a record-high number. During the following five months (October 2018 through February 2019), that record was shattered by the arrest of 136,150 people traveling in families. On March 31, 2019, Trump threatened to close the border, cutting off trade between the countries. On April 4, Trump said that instead he would give Mexico a year to stop illegal drugs from coming into the U.S. If this did not happen, he said tariffs on automobiles would be used first, and then closing of the border.

Proposed wall
While running for president, Trump estimated that a border wall would cost $8 to $12 billion and that he could force Mexico to pay for it. Cost estimates of the proposed wall vary widely. In early 2017, shortly after Trump took office, the DHS estimated the cost at $22 billion, while Democratic staff on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee estimated $70 billion to build the wall and $150 million in annual maintenance. Significant cost overruns and missed deadlines are common in government projects; in recent U.S. history, see, for example, the Big Dig and the Boeing Dreamliner.

In the summer of 2017, four major construction companies planned to bid for the contract. The Customs and Border Protection agency budgeted $20 million to hire these companies to build half-million-dollar prototypes of the wall. At this time, Congress had only approved $341 million to maintain the existing wall; no funds had been allocated to build new sections of wall. The DHS recommended that the wall's height should be between 18. and 30. ft and its depth should be up to 6. ft to deter drug traffickers from building tunnels.

During the Trump administration, 455 mi were added to barrier between the two countries. The construction of the wall has been halted by President Joe Biden as he canceled the national emergency declaration, originally used by Trump.

Biden administration
The U.S. Border Patrol detained more than 1.7 million migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally in fiscal year 2021, the highest number ever recorded. A greater demographic diversity of southwest border apprehensions have been noted in 2021.

On October 31, 2023, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified before the Senate Homeland Security Committee that more than 600,000 people illegally made their way into the United States without being apprehended by border agents during the 2023 fiscal year.

On February 8, 2024, a group of 24 House Republicans wrote a letter to urge President Biden not to federalize the Texas National Guard in the midst of Texas wanting to crack down on the spike of illegal immigration on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Humanitarian assistance along the border
Humanitarian groups such as Humane Borders, No More Deaths, and Samaritans provide water in order to reduce deaths of immigrants who are journeying through the Arizona desert. A policy passed in 2010 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife federal agency allows water drums to be placed on roads of disturbed areas.

No More Deaths (No Más Muertes) is a non-governmental organization (NGO) headquartered in Tucson that is designed to assist in ending death and suffering of immigrants along the U.S.-Mexico border by upholding fundamental human rights. Elemental services of No More Deaths is to provide humanitarian assistance, giving food and first aid treatment, witness and respond to human rights abuses, encouraging humane immigration policy, and making phone calls to relatives of immigrants. Since its founding in 2004, No More Deaths has provided assistance to thousands of migrant border crossers; however the Border Patrol and other public land agencies near the U.S.–Mexico border have challenged the efforts of various humanitarian groups, by following immigrants to a medical volunteer camp and raiding it. Humanitarian groups along the border have been tested by Border Patrol and other agencies, however the authority of the Trump administration has introduced a new tier of restriction through surveillance, harassment, and intimidation to border relief efforts.

Incidence rates of HIV and tuberculosis are higher in border towns such as El Paso and Ciudad Juárez than at the national level in both countries. The Nuestra Casa Initiative tried to counter the health disparities by using a cross-border strategy that moved around an exhibit prominent in various museums and universities. Similarly, special action groups as part of the Border Health Strategic Initiative created by the University of Arizona with other groups helped create a healthier Hispanic community in Arizona border towns by creating policy and infrastructure changes. These groups provided humanitarian assistance to counter the prominence of Type 2 diabetes among the Hispanic community by acquiring a grant for new walking trails and encouraging public elementary schools to provide healthier food choices for students.

Immigrants are considered easy targets by gang members, because they do not have the strength to resist aggressive offenders and end up left with nothing. In June 2018, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions disqualified victims of gangs or domestic violence to be reasonable causes for asylum seekers.

Not only do these Hispanic communities face health inequalities, but political inequalities as well. The need for political change was so huge that it has encouraged Hispanic women to engage in activism at a local level. The Neighborhood Action Group in Chula Vista, California, is one of the groups that attracted the help of local Hispanic women to implement a feminist perspective in activism in spite of the social and economic obstacles as well as Assembly Bill No. 775, 2005 that prohibited children being used as interpreters. These humanitarian groups have implemented various strategies to pursue their goals that ultimately try to counter the number of immigrant deaths and abuses in immigrant detention even if it means the criminalization and higher levels of discrimination against them.

In Mexico, most humanitarian groups focus on assisting the deportees. As rates of deportation increase, "the deportation of many individuals is becoming more and more notable" in the streets of Mexico cities. As a result, many humanitarian groups have formed in Mexican cities where undocumented individuals are deported such as Nogales, Sonora. The humanitarian groups consist of faith-based communities and primarily non-profit organizations that assist deportees, many of whom do not have any resources with them such as money, food, or family information, and who would otherwise become homeless and emotionally and psychologically devastated. Contributing factors that might have caused them to be devastated can either be that they were separated from "their family members or the inability to work legally in the United States". Therefore, the primary purpose of the humanitarian groups on the Mexico side of the border is to create a pathway for transitional support such as providing the deportees food, shelter, clothing, legal help and social services. In addition, there are humanitarian groups that provides meals and shelter to deportees according to their deportation documents. Humanitarian groups along the border in Mexico are El Comedor, Nazareth House, Camino Juntos, La 72, and FM4: Paso Libre.

In June 2019, 300 migrant children were moved from a detention facility in Clint, Texas, after a group of lawyers who visited reported unsafe and unsanitary conditions. In the same month, the body of Óscar Alberto Martínez and his 23-month-old daughter, Angie Valeria, were found dead in the Rio Grande River. The family was from El Salvador, attempting to cross from Mexico into the U.S. near Brownsville, Texas. Gaining attention from the media, the House passed a bill, appropriating $4.5 billion for resources at the border.

US border zone policies
Per the La Paz Agreement, the official "border area" extends 100. km "on either side of the inland and maritime boundaries" from the Gulf of Mexico west into the Pacific Ocean. There is also a 100-mile border zone.

Secure Border Initiative
A National Border Patrol Strategic Plan was first developed in 1994; it was then updated in 2004 and 2012. In 2004, the updated strategy focused on command structures, intelligence and surveillance, enforcement and deployment of U.S. Border Patrol agents to better respond to threats at the border. The strategic planning led to broader policy development for the DHS which led to the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) in 2005 to secure U.S. borders and reduce illegal migration. The main components of SBI dealt with staffing concerns, removal capacity, surveillance and tactical infrastructure and interior enforcement. The aim of this initiative is to overcome the limitations of physical barriers through the use of surveillance technologies known as "SBInet." The SBInet technology has not worked as well as potentially intended, facing a number of technical issues that have limited its effectiveness. Part of the initiative also focused on increasing detention and removal capacity, with an objective to add an additional 2,000 beds to detentional facilities. With expansion of detention and removal capabilities this was also the objective to end the "catch and release" process that had been occurring previously. An additional component was "high consequence enforcement", which was not the subject of a formal public policy document. There was the allowance, historically, for voluntary returns of individuals apprehended at the border by Border Patrol agents. These voluntary returns, after the SBI of 2005, were limited to three "high consequence outcomes".

One "high consequence outcome" was formal removal, which meant the individual would be deemed ineligible for a visa for at least five years and subject to criminal charges if caught re-entering illegally. The Immigration and Nationality Act permitted aliens to be formally removed with "limited judicial processing" known as expedited removal. The DHS has expanded between 2002 and 2006, expedited removal for "certain aliens that entered within previous two weeks and were apprehended within 100. mi of the border".

Another "high consequence outcome" is the increase in criminal charges. The DHS has also worked with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to increase the number of apprehended individuals crossing the border illegally who are charged with criminal offenses. Most of these cases are prosecuted under Operation Streamline. The third "high consequence outcome" is known as remote repatriation. This is the return of apprehended Mexicans to remote locations by Border Patrol rather than the nearest Mexican port of entry.

100-mile border zone

The U.S. has established a 100. mi border zone which applies to all U.S. external borders including all coasts, in effect covering two-thirds of the U.S. population, including a majority of the largest cities in the U.S. and several entire states (namely Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Rhode Island). The border zone was established by the U.S. DOJ in its interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials have authority to stop and search within this zone and are authorized to enter private property without a warrant within 25 mi of the border as well as establish checkpoints.

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects against unreasonable search and seizure. However, under the border search exception, this protection does not fully apply at borders or border crossings (also known as ports of entry) or in the border zone. This means that much of the U.S. population is subject to CBP regulations including stop and search. There are some limits to CBP officials' ability to stop and search. For instance CBP officials are not allowed to pull anyone over without a reasonable suspicion of immigration violation or crime, or search vehicles without warrant or probable cause. The ACLU, however, found that CBP officials routinely ignore or misunderstand the limits of authority, and this is compounded by inadequate training, lack of oversight and failure to hold officials accountable for abuse—incidence of abuse is common.

Operation Streamline

Operation Streamline refers collectively to zero-tolerance policies implemented at the Mexico–U.S. border that seek to remove illegal immigrants through an expedited process if they have arrived with missing or fraudulent identification or have previously been convicted for an immigration crime. It was first implemented in Del Rio, Texas, in 2005. The program has since expanded to four out of the five federal judicial districts on the U.S.–Mexico border: Yuma, Arizona; Laredo, Texas; Tucson, Arizona; and Rio Grande Valley, Texas.

Previously, immigrants apprehended at the border were either given the option to voluntarily return to their home country or they were placed in civil immigration proceedings. After Operation Streamline was implemented, nearly all people apprehended at the border who are suspected of having crossed illegally are subject to criminal prosecution. Defendants who are charged with crossing into the U.S. illegally are tried en masse to determine their guilt. Defense attorneys often are responsible for representing up to 40 immigrants at once. Around 99% of defendants in Operation Streamline proceedings plead guilty. The defendants are charged with a misdemeanor if convicted of crossing the border illegally for the first time and a felony if it is a repeat offense.

In December 2009, it was decided in United States v. Roblero-Solis that en masse judicial proceedings like those in Operation Streamline violated Rule 11 in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rule 11 states that the court must determine that a guilty plea is voluntarily made by addressing the defendant personally in court. The Roblero-Solis case determined that "personally" means that the judge must address the defendant in a person-to-person manner. Though many courts have changed their procedures to adapt to the ruling, there are still forms of en masse trials practiced at the border.

Proponents of Operation Streamline claim that the harsher prosecution has been an important factor in deterring immigrants from crossing the border illegally. Apprehensions have decreased in certain sectors after 2005, which is seen as a sign of success. For example, the Del Rio sector saw a decline from 2005 to 2009 of 75% (from 68,510 to 17,082). Similarly, apprehensions declined in Yuma by 95% (from 138,438 to 6,951) from 2006 to 2009.

Criticisms of Operation Streamline point to the program's heavy use of federal court and enforcement resources as a negative aspect. In addition, the prosecution of all illegal border crossings takes the focus away from prosecuting more serious crimes. They claim that the program's cost is too high for the effectiveness of the work it is accomplishing. In response to the claim that Operation Streamline is an effective deterrent, critics of the program claim that the incentives to cross the border in order to work or be with family are much stronger.

Environment
The Agreement on Cooperation for the Protection and Improvement of the Environment in the Border Area, known as the La Paz Agreement, was signed into law on August 14, 1983, and became enforceable on February 16, 1984. This agreement to protect the environment is the political foundation between the U.S. and Mexico for 4 subsequent programs. Each program has addressed environmental destruction in the border region resulting from the rise of the maquiladora industries, those who migrated to northern Mexico to work in the industries, the lack of infrastructure to accommodate the people, Mexico's lax regulations concerning all these factors, the resulting spillover into the U.S., and the U.S.'s own environmentally destructive tendencies. The programs were: IBEP (1992), Border XXI (1996), Border 2012 (2003) and Border 2020 (2012).

In 2006, during the presidency of George W. Bush, Congress approved Secure Fence Act which allowed the Department of Homeland Security to erect a border fence along the U.S.–Mexico border. Congress also approved a different law called the REAL ID Act which gave the Department of Homeland Security the approval to build the wall without taking into consideration the environmental and legal issues related to the wall. The U.S. Congress insisted that the act was passed for the sake of national security of the U.S.

According to a delegation of Arizona park and refuge managers, wildlife biologists, and conservationists who studied the U.S. and Mexico border concluded that building a wall along the Mexico border would also have negative impacts on the natural environment in the region. They argued that the border wall would negatively affect the wildlife in the Sonoran Desert including plants and animals. Naturally, animals do not tend to stay in one place and instead, they expedite to various places for water, plants, and other means in order to survive. The wall would restrict animals to a specific territory and would reduce their chances of survival. According to Brian Segee, a staff attorney with Wildlife Activists says that except high flying birds, animals would not be able to move to other places because of the wall along the border. For instance, participants in this study argued that some species such as javelinas, ocelots, and Sonoran pronghorn would not be able to freely move along the border areas. It would also restrict the movement of jaguars from Sierra Madre occidental forests to the southwestern parts of the U.S. According to Brian Nowicki, a conservation biologist at the Center for Biological Diversity, there are 30 animal species living in the Arizona and Sonora that face danger. In 2021, an endangered Mexican gray wolf was stopped from crossing from New Mexico into Mexico by a section of border wall.

Drug trafficking
Mexico is estimated to be the world's third largest producer of opium with poppy cultivation. It also is a major supplier of heroin and the largest foreign supplier of marijuana, cocaine and methamphetamine to the U.S. market. According to the DEA, about 93% of the cocaine in the United States came from Colombia and was smuggled across the border between Mexico and the United States. In 2017, the INL estimated that "between 90 and 94 percent of all heroin consumed in the United States comes from Mexico." These drugs are supplied by drug trafficking organizations. The U.S. government estimates that Mexican drug cartels gain tens of billions of dollars each year from drug sales in the U.S. alone.

Border towns on the Mexico–United States border have been negatively affected by the opioid crisis in the United States. According to César González Vaca, head of the Forensic Doctor's Service in Baja California, "It seems the closer we are to the border, the more consumption of this drug we see." In 2021, around 80,411 people died from opioid overdoses in the United States. Many of the deaths are from an extremely potent opioid, fentanyl, which is trafficked from Mexico. The drug is usually manufactured in China, then shipped to Mexico, where it is processed and packaged, which is then smuggled into the United States by Mexican drug cartels. In 2023, the Biden administration announced a crackdown on members of the Sinaloa Cartel smuggling fentanyl into the United States.

Transborder students
Many schools near the border in America have students that live on the Mexican side of the border. These students are "transborder students", as they live in Mexico but are enrolled in the U.S. education system. There are thousands of elementary through high school students that cross the Mexican-American border. They are known to wake up in the early hours of the morning to make their way to the border, where they wait in long lines to cross into the U.S. After crossing the border, the students find a ride to school. Many students come to America for the opportunity, because it has a more developed and organized educational system. Students who go to school in America have a better chance of reaching higher education in the U.S. In many parts of Mexico, compulsory education ends at age sixteen. Many of the transborder students are natural-born U.S. citizens. Students that were born in America have the right to American education, even if they do not live in the U.S. In places like the San Diego and Tijuana border, it is much cheaper to live in Mexico. San Diego has a high cost of living and one of the highest student homeless rates in the country, so many families move to Tijuana because it is more affordable to raise a family.

In order to prevent Mexican children from illegally coming to America for education, some bordertown schools require official documentation (bills, mail, etc.) from students. This is to ensure that only students that are entitled to an education in the U.S. receive one.

In Brownsville, a city on the southern border of Texas, a court ruled that school districts cannot deny students education if they have the proper paperwork. Many transborder students who live in these districts with these requirements will use extended family members' addresses to prove their residency. Questions about the legitimacy of student residency have risen since the Trump administration took office in 2017, making it riskier to cross the border for education.

These transborder students also raise questions about the acquisition of healthcare, as most Mexican students who attend university in the U.S. who also have family across the border are known to use the Mexican healthcare system instead of U.S. or university sources. The opposite case was also studied, seeking to find if U.S. students and citizens outsource their medical care from Mexican hospitals; however it was concluded that the use of, "cross-border healthcare diminishes significantly with English language acquisition."

Also researched is the impact of changing education for those children who attended school in the U.S. prior to deportation, and are now readjusting to a new education system within Mexico. In one study, when repatriated children were asked about how their world perspectives were changed once they returned to Mexico, they spoke to three main areas, "shifting identities, learning and losing named language, and schooling across borders." The most frequent point mentioned in terms of changing schooling is the difficulty to adapt to a system in which they are unfamiliar, in a named language they might have lost, and where there is minimal continuity in the methodology of teaching. It is suggested in this study that while the U.S. has a long history of teaching immigrant students, along with tried and tested assimilation programming to support foreign children in U.S. border schools, Mexican systems do not, making the change nearly impossible for newly deported students to learn. While the Mexican Secretariat of the Public has vowed to change the legislation surrounding this issue, bilingual education is still only awarded to expensive private schools.

title: Mexico–United States border


text:
WRS

Wrs, or WRS, may refer to:

Arts and entertainment

 * Andrei Ursu, a Romanian singer, previously known as Wrs
 * World Radio Switzerland, a Swiss English-language station

Businesses

 * Western Rail Switching, a former railroad in the United States
 * Wind River Systems, a former embedded software company, now part of Intel

Military

 * War reserve stock, material held for wartime
 * 53d Weather Reconnaissance Squadron, also known as Hurricane Hunters

Other uses

 * Waris language, spoken on New Guinea (ISO 639-3: )
 * Wolcott-Rallison syndrome, a rare medical disorder
 * Worker Registration Scheme, a registration scheme for foreign workers in the United Kingdom
 * World record size, in the Registry of World Record Size Shells
 * Wressle railway station, East Yorkshire, England (CRS code: WRS)

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

title: WRS


text:
William Killigrew (1606–1695)

Sir William Killigrew (1606–1695) of Kempton Park, Middlesex, was an English court official under Charles I and Charles II.

He was the son of Sir Robert Killigrew (d. 1633/5) and Mary Woodhouse, of Kimberley, Norfolk, his wife. He was the elder brother to Thomas Killigrew. By his wife Mary, daughter of John Hill of Honilay, Warwickshire, he had three sons: Henry (d. 1661), William, a captain in the army, and Sir Robert. Their daughter Elizabeth (d. 1677) married Francis Clinton, 6th Earl of Lincoln with whom she had one child, Francis Clinton, who died in infancy. Killigrew was knighted in May 1626. He was elected MP for Newport and Penryn, Cornwall in March 1628, but only sat for the latter. In 1629, he and his father were jointly awarded the Governorship of Pendennis Castle. However, after some trouble, he resigned in favour of Sir Nicholas Slanning in April 1635.

In 1634, he granted a 99-year lease of 6 shares of land (150 acre) in Hamilton Tribe of Bermuda to his uncle, Henry Woodhouse, former governor of Bermuda. The rent was nominal – 100 oranges, 100 lemons and 100 potatoes, payable at the Feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary – but Woodhouse did not keep up the payments. In 1637, Killigrew reclaimed the land. With partners, he attempted to drain the Lincolnshire Fens, an immensely expensive undertaking. This involved him in considerable local strife. During the English Civil War he gave loyal and effective support to the King.

In 1646 he presented himself to the directors of the Levant Company and insisted that he was the king's choice as ambassador to Constantinople. His candidacy was not considered.

At the Restoration he was made the Queen's Vice-Chamberlain, an influential and well-rewarded post. In 1663 Killigrew published A proposal, shewing how this nation may be vast gainers by all the sums of money, given to the Crown,... in which he advocated that the government issue £2m in transferable bonds with the interest being covered by a yearly tax of £300k. The bonds would be for denominations between £5 and £100, mostly in the smaller denominations. The state would provide a regulatory framework to avoid fraud and ensure they were accepted as legal tender. The proposal was implemented by Secretary of the Treasury, George Downing, who started issuing Treasury Orders. Initially he hoped to side step the financial power of the goldsmith bankers. However, by 1672 most of the orders were in the hands of a handful of such bankers, and so ended up increasing their power.

From 1664 to 1679 he was Member of Parliament for Richmond in Yorkshire.

He was the author of four plays of some merit. The four dramas, with their dates of publication, are:

 * Ormasdes, or Love and Friendship (1664)
 * Pandora, or the Converts (1664)
 * Selindra (1664)
 * The Siege of Urbin (1666).

The tragicomedy The Siege of Urbin has often been considered his best play. Poet Edmund Waller addressed verses to Killigrew on the subject of Pandora, which indicate that the play was originally a tragedy; Killigrew revised it into a comedy after the tragic version failed onstage.

title: William Killigrew (1606–1695)


text:
Fatma Begum

Fatma Begum (1892–1983) was an Indian actress, director, and screenwriter. She is often considered the first female film director of Indian cinema. Within four years, she went on to write, produce and direct many films. She launched her own production house, Fatma Films, which later became Victoria-Fatma Films, and directed her first film, Bulbul-e-Paristan, in 1926.

Family
Fatma Begum was born into an Urdu-speaking Muslim family in India. She was supposedly married to Nawab Sidi Ibrahim Muhammad Yakut Khan III of Sachin State. However, there is no record of a marriage or contract having taken place between the Nawab and Fatma or of the Nawab having recognised any of her children as his own, a prerequisite for legal paternity in Muslim family law. She was the mother of silent superstars Zubeida, Sultana, and Shehzadi. She was also the grandmother of Humayun Dhanrajgir and Durreshahwar Dhanrajgir, son and daughter of Zubeida and Maharaja Narsingir Dhanrajgir of Hyderabad and Jamila Razzaq daughter of Sultana and Seth Razaaq, a prominent businessman of Karachi. She also happened to be the great-grandmother of model turned actress Rhea Pillai who is the daughter of her grand daughter Durreshahwar Dhanrajgir.

Career
She began her career on the Urdu stage. She later shifted to films and debuted in Ardeshir Irani's silent film, Veer Abhimanyu (1922). It was common practice for men to play women in plays and movies, so she became a huge woman superstar. Fatma Begum was fair skinned and wore dark make-up that suited the sepia/black & white images on the screen. Most of the roles required wigs for the heroes as well as the heroines.

In 1926, she established Fatma Films which later became known as Victoria-Fatima Films in 1928. She became a pioneer for fantasy cinema where she used trick photography to have early special effects. She was an actress at Kohinoor Studios and Imperial Studios, while writing, directing, producing, and acting in her own films at Fatma Films.

Begum became the first female director of Indian cinema with her 1926 film, Bulbul-e-Paristan. While no known prints of the film currently exist, the high budget production has been described as a fantasy film featuring many special effects. If true, the film places Begum among early pioneers of fantasy cinema such as George Melies. While continuing to produce and appear in her own work, Fatma worked for Kohinoor Studios and Imperial Studios until her last film in 1938, Duniya Kya Hai?

She directed many other films, her last being the Goddess of Luck in 1929.

Legacy
She died in 1983 at the age of 91. Her legacy was carried on by her daughter Zubeida acted in India's first ever talkie, Alam Ara, in addition to being a silent film star.

title: Fatma Begum


text:
McIntyre, Ontario

McIntyre, Ontario may refer to:

 * McIntyre, Lennox and Addington County, Ontario
 * McIntyre, Grey County, Ontario

title: McIntyre, Ontario


text: User talk:70.58.225.192

title: User talk:70.58.225.192


text:
Talk:Alcântara, Lisbon

This reads to me like copyvio, but I can't find an online source -- Avocado 16:39, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alcântara (Lisbon). 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 tag to http://www.dgterritorio.pt/ficheiros/cadastro/caop/caop_download/caop_2014_0/areasfregmundistcaop2014_2
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110702134506/http://www.jf-alcantara.pt/Default.aspx?Module=ArtigoForm&ID=42 to http://www.jf-alcantara.pt/Default.aspx?Module=ArtigoForm&ID=42

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) 08:12, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Alcântara, Lisbon


text:
Fishguard Harbour railway station

Fishguard Harbour railway station serves the port of Fishguard Harbour, Wales. It is the terminus of one of the branches of the West Wales Line from Swansea. The area is also now served (since it reopened on 14 May 2012) by Fishguard and Goodwick railway station.

History
The Great Western Railway took over the North Pembrokeshire and Fishguard Railway by agreement of 12 February 1898. Its intent was to turn Fishguard into a purpose-built ocean liner port because it wanted to take trans-Atlantic passenger traffic away from Plymouth and Southampton. In preparation of this, the GWR opened its first station, Fishguard & Goodwick railway station, in 1899 when work on the new port began with the construction of Fishguard Harbour's East breakwater.

In conjunction with building the East Breakwater, a new 2 mi railway would be built to connect to the liner terminal with the West Wales line. The line, which would bypass the steeper gradients and curves on this part of the original line, would have a deep cutting, embankments and two tunnels. However, within two years, the project to build the breakwater and ocean-going terminal was abandoned after it became clear silting (which could not be prevented by dredging) would prevent large ocean-going ships from ever using the port. The East Breakwater was left unfinished. Although two sections of the new railway to the proposed port terminal were completed before the project ended, they were abandoned and never used. Rail traffic would continue to use the original route to Goodwick.

Despite being unable to complete the project as envisaged, the GWR still wanted to create a new port. The 900 m North Breakwater was created in deeper water by quarrying stone from the headland at Goodwick. The quarried-out area became the new quay and terminus for the West Wales line. On 30 August 1906, Fishguard harbour station was officially opened when the Waterford and Cork ferry services were transferred from Neyland to Fishguard Harbour. Three years later, the first Cunard liner to call at Fishguard was the RMS Mauretania (1906) on 30 August 1909. However, passengers had to be transferred ashore to the waiting London train by tender due to the shallowness of the harbour.

Current facilities
The station is not owned by Network Rail but by Stena Line. A large part of the station is contained within the port building where there is seating and toilets. However, there are no railway ticket machines and the station is staffed only by Stena Line personnel, no rail staff are employed there. This means there is no rail ticket office and passengers travelling from Fishguard by train must purchase their tickets in advance by post, at a different station, or on board their train. The majority of passengers using the station are in possession of SailRail tickets issued at Rosslare Europort or another station in Ireland. The station has step-free access throughout and the station's owners, Stena Line, permit smoking on the platform. The station also has both long and short stay parking. The minimum connection time from Fishguard Harbour is seven minutes, and when bus replacement services are operating, the buses leave from the car park adjacent to the level crossing.

After the ban on smoking in public became law in Wales in April 2007, the station became the only one in the UK where it was still permitted. Stena Line allowed passengers to continue to smoke on the platform because it was deemed too dangerous for them to smoke at the nearest point where it was technically permissible: a level crossing over a busy road. Smoking is banned at all stations operated by Network Rail.

Rail services
Since the station is located in the harbour, its primary purpose has always been providing links with sea going transport. As such, there have always been daily services to and from Fishguard Harbour which coincide with the ferry services to Rosslare in Ireland.

1949

 * There were two night-time express trains that ran daily to and from London Paddington.
 * Eight trains operated Monday to Saturday to and from Clarbeston Road stopping at Wolf's Castle Halt, Welsh Hook Halt, Mathry Road, Jordanston Halt and Fishguard & Goodwick.
 * One of those trains were extended to and from Neyland.

April 1964 to May 2003

 * All the services serving the other stations on the branch were withdrawn on 6 April 1964, leaving the station served by boat trains only. This was during the Beeching cuts period.
 * Since that date the only scheduled passenger services have been the boat trains.
 * In recent years these have been one night service and one day service all year round, despite the summer-only fast ferry. At one stage the night service was formed of an InterCity 125 train running direct to/from London Paddington. The daytime service was the same, although perhaps for only part of the year. British Rail, and later First Great Western and its predecessor Great Western Trains all operated InterCity 125 services to Fishguard Harbour.
 * In 2000, the night service was still operated by First Great Western (using InterCity 125s) but the daytime train was operated by Wales & West, meaning there were no longer any daytime through services to Paddington.
 * Wales & West's services were transferred to Wales & Borders when Wales & West was split up.

May 2003 to September 2003
In 2003 the remaining First Great Western Fishguard services were withdrawn when the franchise was taken over by Wales & Borders. This ended almost a century of direct services to or from London Paddington. However, through services to and from other stations were added to the timetable.

 * The night-time train started from London Waterloo every-day, connecting with Eurostar continental services, with the train arriving at 02.38 Tuesday to Saturday mornings, and 01.00 Sunday and Monday mornings. Because of this later arrival on Tuesday to Saturday, this arriving service ran empty to Carmarthen rather than form a return journey.
 * The night-time train went to Liverpool Lime Street on Monday to Saturdays and Bristol Temple Meads on Sundays, leaving each day at 01.50. On Tuesday to Saturdays, this was formed of empty stock run from Carmarthen, whereas on Sundays and Mondays, it was formed of the incoming train from Waterloo.
 * On Monday to Fridays, the day-time train started from Cardiff Central between 30 June and 5 September, not stopping Swansea and Carmarthen stations. Before and after these dates, the train started from Swansea and also called at Carmarthen.
 * On Saturdays, the daytime train went to and from Rhymney
 * On Sundays, the daytime train started at Newport, and went only as far as Carmarthen although it offered a 5- to 10-minute connection at Carmarthen for London-bound trains.

From September 2003 to September 2011
Arriva Trains Wales took over from Wales & Borders in December 2003
 * A daytime train operated to and from Cardiff Central, arriving and leaving Fishguard Harbour between 1pm and 2pm, often starting from and/or terminating at stations beyond Cardiff, such as Birmingham New Street in 2003.
 * In 2010 and 2011 the service started from Cardiff and called only at Llanelli and Whitland en route to Fishguard Harbour, making it the only scheduled passenger service to use the Carmarthen avoider line. On the return, the train called at Carmarthen as well as Whitland and Llanelli before reaching Cardiff Central, the train then continued onwards to Cheltenham Spa.
 * These daytime services therefore avoided Swansea in both directions. This is normally achieved using the Swansea District Line, but occasionally the service was routed via the "Swansea Avoiding Line" around the back of Landore Train Maintenance Depot instead.
 * A daily train operated at night, arriving and leaving Fishguard Harbour between 1am and 2am.
 * The train operated to and from Swansea, but sometimes originated from stations beyond Swansea.
 * As maintenance of the railways is predominantly done at night, this train was frequently replaced by buses. This was normally known well in advance.  When buses replace the trains, the bus usually arrived at  Fishguard Harbour at around 02.05 and left after loading/unloading passengers, normally around 02.10.

From September 2011 to May 2017
All services were operated by Arriva Trains Wales. The level of service was greatly enhanced from 12 September 2011 when five extra services per day in each direction commenced running to and from Fishguard Harbour Mondays to Saturdays. The five extra services are as follows:

Outbound

 * Two trips to Clarbeston Road, with connections to stations further afield
 * One trip to Manchester Piccadilly
 * Two trips to Carmarthen

Inbound
These are provided on a trial basis until September 2014 and are in addition to the two daily 'boat-trains', one at lunch time and one in the dead of night, which provide the traditional ferry connections. The extra services are the first regular timetabled services to Fishguard Harbour that have not been provided solely for connection with ferries since local services were withdrawn in 1964. Since the additional services only run Monday to Saturday, only the two trains connecting with ferry services serve the station on a Sunday.
 * One early-morning trip to Fishguard Harbour from Carmarthen (with no connection from further east)
 * Two arrivals from Cardiff Central
 * One of these detaches from a train to Pembroke Dock at Whitland
 * The other was later extended to start from Gloucester
 * Two trips from Clarbeston Road to Fishguard, one of which forms a connection out of a train from Manchester via Cardiff and Swansea (the other has no connection from further east)

The decision to introduce additional trains has been credited to two teenagers from Moylegrove who collected a 1,440 signature petition in support of the move. A consultation was held in May/June 2011 on the planned services, but did not result in much adjustment to the times. The additional trains for Fishguard initiative has guaranteed funding until 2014, during which a review will be carried out to identify demand and passenger numbers and future funding. The extra services, with trains to and from Cardiff and Clarbeston Road, are not quite what was expected when the Welsh Assembly Government announced it would be funding up to £1.4m annually to provide extra services between Carmarthen and Fishguard.

2017
The ferry sailing schedule was significantly revised in May 2017 resulting in changes to the train times. As a result, there are no longer trains during the night and the 01.50 departure is discontinued. From May 2018 it was proposed to extend the 19.30 from Manchester to Carmarthen to Fishguard Harbour, returning at 02.37 to Carmarthen, with an equivalent bus replacement in the early hours of Sunday.

2021
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, services on the Fishguard branch have been reduced. As of August 2021, there are two daily departures from Mondays to Saturdays - one at midday, and one in the late evening. Both services run to Carmarthen, with the midday service continuing to Cardiff Central.

On Sundays, there is an increased service of three trains per day. The additional mid-afternoon service runs to Swansea.

title: Fishguard Harbour railway station


text:
Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning

Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning is a 2005 parody fan film produced by five friends in a two-room flat in Finland with a small budget and the support of a few hundred fans and several dozen acquaintances. It is the seventh production in the Star Wreck movie series, and the first of professional quality and feature length. It is a dark science fiction comedy about domination of the world and the universe, and a parody of the Star Trek and Babylon 5 franchises.

The original version ("net version") of the film is available as an authorized and legal download on the Internet under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND license.

Plot
The newly established P-Fleet travels to a remote region of space. They approach an anomaly, identified as a "maggot hole". On the bridge of the C.P.P. Potkustartti, Captain James B. Pirk (Samuli Torssonen) reminisces about his experiences since the end of the previous film, Star Wreck V: Lost Contact. Pirk was stranded on Earth at the end of the 20th century, his spaceship destroyed, his crew dispersed to avoid changing Earth's history.

Years later, Pirk realized that Earth's history had not developed as expected since first contact with the Vulgars. Instead of helping Mankind to conquer space, the Vulgars were corrupted by rock star Jeffrey Cochbrane, who sold their spaceship to the Russians. Pirk takes matters into his own hands, and with his old crew members Commander Dwarf (Timo Vuorensola) and Commander Info (Antti Satama), he locates the spaceship of the Vulgars. Gaining the trust of the Russian President, he builds the spaceship C.P.P. Potkustartti and subsequently the "P-Fleet". Due to his monopoly on superior technology, Pirk takes control of the Earth and becomes its emperor.

Pirk desires further conquest. He takes the fleet through the maggot hole to a parallel universe, in which history has taken a different path. Pirk announces his intent to conquer the parallel universe to Captain Johnny K. Sherrypie, the commander of the Babel 13 space station. Sherrypie resists and sends his fleet to counter Pirk's. Babel 13's fleet is devastated. Sherrypie surrenders to the P-Fleet's forces and lures Pirk and his security detail with promises of shore leave and sexual encounters with the Babel 13's female personnel.

Sherrypie and his crew later try to assassinate Pirk, but he and his men escape. Battle resumes with the arrival of the Excavator, commanded by Festerbester. In a bitter fight, the P-Fleet suffers considerable losses, and the Excavator inflicts heavy damage on the Potkustartti. Crippled, the Potkustartti is set on a collision course, and the bridge personnel evacuate to Fukov's ship, the C.P.P. Kalinka. The destructive force of the Potkustartti ramming the Excavator during a "twist core split" (a parody of Star Trek's "warp core breach") destroys both ships. The remaining five P-Fleet ships approach Babel 13, preparing to destroy it, but Sherrypie's security officer Mikhail Garybrandy (Jari Ahola) has primed the station's reactor to blow up. The blast destroys the other ships, but the Kalinka escapes through the maggot hole, spiraling out of control and crashing into what appears to be ice age Earth. Pirk, Info and Dwarf beam down to safety as the ship crashes. The ending mirrors Pirk's initial predicament: he is stranded without a ship during an uneventful time in history. Info suggests he go into power save mode and revive himself in the distant future to stop the fleet from entering the maggot hole. The scene shifts to Earth's orbit where a cloud of high tech debris exists, suggesting that they are trapped in a post-apocalyptic future, not the prehistoric past.

Characters
Most of the major characters are parodies of characters from Star Trek or Babylon 5.

Members of the P-Fleet

 * Captain/Emperor James B. Pirk, played by Samuli Torssonen. A character based on James T. Kirk and Jean-Luc Picard, his surname an amalgamation of the two, who amounts to a megalomaniac, egotistic and incompetent fool with incredible luck. He has an eye for tactics in ship-to-ship combat, but lacks any social abilities. The only reason he has ever advanced beyond Sub-Lieutenant are his tactical skills and his ability to keep discipline by bullying.
 * Commander Info, played by Antti Satama. A parody of Data. He is an android and has a tendency to speak in overly long sentences full of technobabble, which others like Pirk don't really seem to understand. On 21st-century Earth, when he runs out of flesh-colored paint, he stops trying to disguise himself.
 * Commander Dwarf, played by Timo Vuorensola. A parody of Worf. He is a psychotic Plingon alien who betrayed his people to join Pirk's crew. True to his Plingon warrior background, he never showers or bathes. Famous for saying "Plingon warriors do not take showers!", he is trigger-happy and eager for action even when it puts the objective at risk.
 * Sergey Fukov, played by Janos Honkonen. A semi-independent character based on Pavel Chekov. He is the great-great-great-great-grandfather of the original Fukov in Star Wreck 1, 2, and 3. Before joining up with Pirk, he was a highly incompetent nuclear engineer at the Chernobyl nuclear plant. He is the only captain of the P-fleet to inflict more destruction on his own ship than on the enemy. As Emperor Pirk says, he is "a brain-dead piss-for-brains Soviet mutant".
 * Lieutenant Swagger, played by Tiina Routamaa. She is a parody of every exploited female officer in the history of science fiction. Lieutenant Swagger is the beautiful but ice-cold helm officer aboard the Potkustartti. Her tough composure only lifts on seeing Pirk in peril. She hates her uniform.

Members of the Babel 13 forces

 * Captain Johnny K. Sherrypie, played by Atte Joutsen. A parody of John Sheridan. He is the commanding officer of space station Babel 13 and likes making long-winded speeches and delaying decisions. Unlike Pirk, he acts very professionally.
 * Commander Susannah Ivanovitsa, played by Satu Heliö. A parody of Susan Ivanova. She is the sarcastic Executive Officer of the Babel 13. Her daily duties consist of reporting parking violations and enduring Sherrypie's speeches. She bemoans the fact that her career seems to have stalled.
 * Festerbester, played by Janos Honkonen. A parody of Alfred Bester. He is a Psy-Co officer with a habit of commandeering ships, and he is a good tactician, about as competent as Fukov is incompetent. He is played by the same actor who plays Fukov (just as Walter Koenig plays both Chekov and Bester).
 * Security Chief Mikhail Garybrandy (Karigrandi), played by Jari Ahola. A parody of Michael Garibaldi, who also parodies Kari Grandi with some of his jokes and with the name. He is Babel 13's head of security, and tends to drink at the most inappropriate moments.

Other characters

 * President Ulyanov, played by Kari Väänänen. His name is a reference to Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin). He is the president of Russia—an honest, well-mannered politician with the best of intentions. Unlike most of the cast, he is played by a professional actor who resorts to overacting to not stand out too much.
 * Ambassador Flush. A parody of Kosh, he utters idle comments in cryptic ways and picks his nose when no one is looking.

Production
The movie was produced by Torssonen, who also played the part of Pirk and was one of the writers. In the early 1990s he produced short animated humorous fan films inspired by Star Trek, under the collective title Star Wreck. During those early years, Torssonen recruited his friends to help him in these productions. Most notable of them was Rudi Airisto, who disliked Star Trek and helped to add parody to these films.

After four animated short films, Torssonen and his friends decided to produce a longer live-action piece. The first was 1997's Star Wreck V: Lost Contact, a straightforward parodistic retelling of Star Trek: First Contact with some original elements. All the non-location shots were produced using a bluescreen technique. This movie, like the preceding animations, was a small cult hit on the Finnish science fiction scene.

After Lost Contact, Torssonen and others intimately involved with its production decided to create a final, sixth episode. It was planned to be a 15-minute live-action special effects heavy film containing the basic plot elements of In the Pirkinning: Pirk acquiring a ship and then a fleet, a quick transport to a Babylon 5-like world, where the Trek-inspired P-fleet ships would have a huge battle with Babylon 5-inspired ships. Airisto was to direct, and the production started in the way Lost Contact was made: without proper planning, but learning as they went. After Airisto moved to the UK to study, Torssonen called Timo Vuorensola and appointed him as director.

The first years of production were a period of learning and recruiting. No footage shot during that time survived to the released film. In 2000 the production crew released an intermediate film, Star Wreck IV½: Weak Performance, a short live-action piece. For the next several years, little progress was visible to outside observers. It took altogether seven years from the first conception of the movie to its release. Most of that time was needed to render all the computer-generated imagery for the special effects and for the virtual sets for all non-location scenes. Each frame in a second took over ten hours to render.

For most of the production, the studio was a converted two-room apartment. One room featured the blue screen and most of the computers and other equipment involved in the shooting. The kitchen contained the render farm, and a closet was used for dubbing. A number of other locations were used, including a newly built college building and a cruise ship.

The film features three professional actors: Jari Ahola, Karoliina Blackburn and Kari Väänänen.

Ships
The ships used in the picture are almost exact copies of ships from Star Trek and Babylon 5, but with parody names. The name of Pirk's ship, CPP Potkustart, means "kickstart" (in the literal sense, lacking the positive connotations of the English word) and is based on USS Enterprise-E. Fukov's ship is called CPP Kalinka and is based on USS Enterprise-A. Several other Starfleet ships are seen but not named. The Excalibur from Crusade becomes the Excavator. Babylon 5 Starfuries are renamed "Star Flurries". Earthforce's Omega class destroyers are referred to as "Amigo Class Destroyers", and bear names like Backgammon and Appalling (parodies of Agamemnon and Apollo from Babylon 5). Two of the Amigos are named after the Finnish military figures Carl Mannerheim and Adolf Ehrnrooth, and one is named after a hero of Finnish mythology, Ilmarinen.

Translation
Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning exploits many kinds of humour, from word play and short gags to character parodies and a black comedy story line. Much of the word-level humour is based on mistranslation. For example, the alien race Minbari from Babylon 5 becomes Minibar.

The Star Trek spoof material is mostly inherited from the earlier Star Wreck films, dating back to the first Star Wreck animation from the time when Torssonen and his friends were in their early teens. Consequently, some of the Star Trek spoofs have a distinctly teenage feel.

Most Star Trek and other science fiction terminology has corresponding terminology in Finnish, introduced through many translations of science fiction. Star Wreck takes these established translations and twists them: for example, a phaser is conventionally translated as vaiheinen ("that which has phases"), while the Star Wreck equivalent is tuikutin (literally, "a thing that can cause twinkling"). Similarly, warp is conventionally translated as poimu (tuck, especially of a garment), while Star Wreck uses kieroutuminen (twisting, crooking or becoming perverse). English subtitles try to apply similar ideas, such as twinkler for phaser, and twist for warp. Photon torpedoes have become light balls, and a wormhole is a maggot hole. Pirk himself has a poor understanding of several words, saying "resorts" instead of "resources" or "moray" instead of "morale", for example.

The character of Mikhail Garybrandy is also a spoof. The Finnish name of the character is Mihail Karigrandi, a reference to the fictional character Kari Grandi, whose adventures for the benefit of thirsty people (bringing them the Grandi-brand juice to drink) were depicted in a long-running series of Finnish TV commercials. The tagline of the commercials is paraphrased in the film roughly as "After all, I am the hero of all who are thirsty ... a legend in our time". The fact that the Garybrandy character likes his alcohol also plays on this idea.

As a spoof of both Star Trek: The Original Series and the Finnish language, the engineer of the Potkustart (credited in the English credits as "the Scottish engineer") speaks Finnish in a heavy Turku dialect. This parodies Montgomery Scott's speaking in Lowland Scots. Moreover, the corresponding English subtitles have been rendered into Lowland Scots.

Reception
During the seven years of production, In the Pirkinning was occasionally mentioned in the Finnish media, including several stories in national television news and in major regional newspapers. Several favourable reviews have been published in Finnish media since the release.

Within a week of the movie's authorized Internet release, more than 300,000 copies of the movie were legally downloaded from the main distribution site, excluding the various mirror sites. Within two weeks, it was estimated that more than 1,500,000 copies had been downloaded in total, including the mirror sites. Within two months, the estimate stood at more than 2.9 million copies downloaded from the official site alone. The film's service provider, Magenta sites, reported over 2 petabytes of data transfers and estimated that total number of downloads, including all mirrors, would be.

On January 28, 2006, In the Pirkinning premiered in Finnish TV, broadcast by YLE TV2 followed by a February 4 rerun on YLE's digital channel, YLE Teema. Teema's broadcast included the earlier movies and a documentary.

Imperial Edition
Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning: Imperial Edition was released on December 13, 2006. It is available on DVD only and is distributed by Universal Pictures Nordic. The original version remains available for download.

In the Imperial Edition, the only major change to the movie itself is that the special effects have been redone and ship models are entirely new. The two-DVD release also has a number of documentaries and a commentary track. The reasons for this release were the production crew's desire to use their own ship designs in the movie and to get additional funding for their next production, Iron Sky.

The Imperial Edition was released in North America in 2009 on a single DVD, but retaining all the features of the Finnish release. For the American release, the box title was shortened to Star Wreck and the box art shows Torssonen wearing a Starfleet uniform with normal Star Trek-style insignia.

Wreckamovie
The experiences of the creators of Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning led them to develop Wreckamovie, a Web 2.0 service that serves all kinds of audiovisual productions, from short films and music videos to feature-length films. The concept is that anyone can build a community for a movie or audiovisual project and ask for assistance with identified production tasks.

title: Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning


text:
Category:The Isley Brothers

Articles referring to or about American singing group The Isley Brothers.

title: Category:The Isley Brothers


text:
Talk:ALCO RSC-3

Untitled
Cut from article space:

This information provided by James A.Crowley Kemble,

Ya forgot the Algerian, Austrailian, Brazilian, Portugese, Pakistani and Panamanian RSC-3 units! Total ALCO and MLW production was 99 units. Steinbrenner p. 295.--SSW9389 (talk) 22:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Both The Diesel Shop and Steinbrenner say there were 71 ALCO-built RSC-3s and 28 MLW-built RSC-3s. So far I've only found 66 of the ALCO-built units. MLW built the PGE and NSWGR units.--SSW9389 (talk) 23:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Found four more units, one Pakistani and three in Uruguay. One production unit still missing. --SSW9389 (talk) 23:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

5 units sold to portugal ... they had 120km/h maximum speed and were os 1668mm broad gauge. Sotavento (talk) 00:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:ALCO RSC-3


text: User talk:69.201.221.206

title: User talk:69.201.221.206


text:
Melrose, Ontario

Melrose, Ontario may refer to:

 * Melrose, Hastings County, Ontario
 * Melrose, Middlesex County, Ontario

title: Melrose, Ontario


text:
Nicolás Lapentti

Nicolás Alexander Lapentti Gómez (born 13 August 1976) is a former professional tennis player from Ecuador. His brothers, Giovanni and Leonardo, uncle Andrés, and cousins Roberto and Emilio also are or were on the pro circuit. His father, also named Nicolás Lapentti, was a star basketball player at the College (now University) of St. Thomas in Minnesota from 1963 to 1967, and played on the Ecuador Olympic team.

Beginnings
Lapentti began playing tennis at the age of six.

He first came to the tennis world's attention an outstanding junior player who won the Orange Bowl in Florida in 1994, when he also captured the junior doubles titles at the French Open (partnering with Gustavo Kuerten) and the US Open.

Professional
Lapentti turned professional in 1995 and won his first top-level singles title later that year at Bogotá.

In 1999, Lapentti was a semi-finalist at the Australian Open, defeating Thomas Johansson, Magnus Norman, Mikael Tillström, Andrew Ilie and Karol Kučera before losing to Thomas Enqvist. He also won two tour singles titles that year and reached his career-high singles ranking of world No. 6 that November.

In 2002, Lapentti won his fifth tour singles title at St. Pölten, beating Fernando Vicente in straight sets in the final. In the second round of that tournament, his rival, Irakli Labadze, faced four match points but was not able to convert any of them. Lapentti finally won that tough match 5–7, 7–6(1), 7–6(6).

His brother, Giovanni, also a professional tennis player, reached a career-high singles ranking of world No. 110 in May 2005. In addition, another brother, Leonardo, has been active at the lower levels of professional tennis.

In the Cincinnati Open 2008, Lapentti defeated David Ferrer in second round, Fernando Verdasco in the third round and faced No. 2 seed Rafael Nadal in the quarterfinals where he lost in straight sets. With that victory over Lapentti, Nadal clinched the world No. 1 ranking for the first time. In his last participation in a Grand Slam championship, he unfortunately had to retire against Novak Djokovic in the first round of the 2009 French Open.

In 2017, it was announced that Nicolás would compete in the Ecuador Open doubles draw alongside brother Giovanni, playing in the final event of his career.

Davis Cup
He has also been a member of the Ecuador Davis Cup team since 1993. Representing his country in Davis Cup since he was 17, and won the deciding rubber against Great Britain (July 2000) to put Ecuador in the World Group. Moreover, he owns the Davis Cup record for most matches won in five sets, with a total of 13 victories.

Personal
He set up the Nicolás Lapentti Foundation in late 2000 to help bring tennis to the underprivileged, and develop future champions. Other interests include soccer and reading Robert Ludlum books.

title: Nicolás Lapentti