Two Russian nationals were detained on St. Lawrence Island after crossing
from Russia into US territory. St. Lawrence Island is part of Alaska, but is closer to the Russian mainland than to the Alaskan mainland. It is largely undeveloped and has a population of 1400 mostly Alaska Native or part Alaska Native residents spread across two villages on the northern coast of the island.

The two Russians had fled a community on the east coast of Russia in order to avoid compulsory military service, and requested asylum from the US. They
were taken to Anchorage and processed in accordance with US immigration laws, which include screening and vetting.

What do you think should be done with these two individuals?

Should they be summarily returned to Russia?

Should their plea for asylum be heard out?

Should they remain in the US while awaiting a decision or should we adopt a "Remain in Russia" policy?

If they do remain in the US, where should we bus them?

Is fleeing a country that is involved in a war outside its own borders
because one fears conscription considered "fleeing violence?"

Do we need to build a wall in the Bering Strait?

Thoughts?

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

Hello Jeff,

Two Russian nationals were detained on St. Lawrence Island after crossing from Russia into US territory. St. Lawrence Island is part of Alaska, but is
closer to the Russian mainland than to the Alaskan mainland. It is largely undeveloped and has a population of 1400 mostly Alaska Native or part Alaska
Native residents spread across two villages on the northern coast of the island.

Why were they detained?

The two Russians had fled a community on the east coast of Russia in order to
avoid compulsory military service, and requested asylum from the US. They were taken to Anchorage and processed in accordance with US immigration laws,
which include screening and vetting.

They were Innuit. By treaty, Innuit can freely travel between Russia
and the USA - without the need of a passport or paperwork of any kind.
All thanks to Reagan and Gorbachev.

What do you think should be done with these two individuals?

Both should be given a feast - with whale meat.

Should they be summarily returned to Russia?

Putin has confiscated all whale meat to be sent to the front.
That is why Innuit travel to Alaska.

Should their plea for asylum be heard out?

By treaty, Innuit have right to travel freely between Russia and
the USA, needing no passport or paperwork of any kind. What part of
that statement did you not understand?

Should they remain in the US while awaiting a decision or should we adopt a
"Remain in Russia" policy?

The matter was decided, long ago, by Reagan and Gorbachev.

If they do remain in the US, where should we bus them?

Innuit have been in Alaska since forever. Innuit have also been
in Siberia since forever. I do not believe that will change anytime
soon.

Is fleeing a country that is involved in a war outside its own borders because one fears conscription considered "fleeing violence?"

Innuit know no borders, as they travel freely anywhere they want
in the Frozen North.

Do we need to build a wall in the Bering Strait?

A wall of ice? Please. Don't make me laugh.

Thoughts?

What nationality are Innuit, as they need no passport to travel?

For Life,
Lee

--
Because not everyone likes licorice

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On 10 Oct 2022, Lee Lofaso said the following...

Why were they detained?

Because they were foreigners crossing over the US border without permission
in order to request asylum on US soil. They apparently entered Gambell, one of the two villages on St. Lawrence Island, but it's not entirely clear how they got from that point to the involvement of US immigration officials. My guess
is that they openly requested asylum and someone got on the phone (or radio) with someone else, and so forth, until it ended up the way that it did.

They were Innuit. By treaty, Innuit can freely travel between Russia
and the USA - without the need of a passport or paperwork of any kind.
All thanks to Reagan and Gorbachev.

If so, then there would have been no need to request asylum. And yet, they
did.

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

On 10 Oct 2022, Lee Lofaso said the following...

Do we need to build a wall in the Bering Strait?

A wall of ice? Please. Don't make me laugh.

I agree that it sounds absurd. But others may have differing opinions.

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

If they do remain in the US, where should we bus them?

We should take in as many Russian refugees as possible. There's no need to bus them around though, because they entered through one of our least populated states, and there's room for them there.

Do we need to build a wall in the Bering Strait?

If it gets to a point where we've got 600,000 gotaways up there in Alaska,
then yes, wall it up! Not just around the straight, but around the whole state.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: CompuBBS | Ashburn VA | cfbbs.scinet-ftn.org (1:275/99)

On 10 Oct 2022, Aaron Thomas said the following...

If they do remain in the US, where should we bus them?

We should take in as many Russian refugees as possible. There's no need
to bus them around though, because they entered through one of our least populated states, and there's room for them there.

That's an interesting take, because it turns out that most Russians who wish
to enter the US without a visa travel to Mexico (which doesn't require visas) and then make their way to the southern US border. Thousands of them have
been encountered after having crossed the border since the war in Ukraine started. These two were an exception to that rule.

So you're ok with refugees crossing the border, as long as they don't cross
at the same place as too many other refugees. Why does that matter?

As far as it being ok because Alaska has a low population density, we've already shown that we're able to redistribute refugees. Why does the fact
that those two men entered over that border vs. the other one gain your sympathy?

Do we need to build a wall in the Bering Strait?

If it gets to a point where we've got 600,000 gotaways up there in
Alaska, then yes, wall it up! Not just around the straight, but around
the whole state.

You do realize that a good portion of Alaska is an archipelago, right? Would you have us build a wall around each island? Would the fishermen have to go
out in the morning to fish and then knock to be let back in at night? On which side of the wall would you suggest their fishing vessels be kept?

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

On 10 Oct 2022, Aaron Thomas said the following...

Do we need to build a wall in the Bering Strait?

If it gets to a point where we've got 600,000 gotaways up there in
Alaska, then yes, wall it up! Not just around the straight, but around
the whole state.

You also realize that the Bering Strait is a body of water, right? Russia is
on one side, Alaska is on the other, and multiple islands are in the Strait itself. This means that putting a wall "around the straight [sic]" would involve building part of that wall on Russian land and enclosing multiple Russian islands within the wall.

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

That's an interesting take, because it turns out that most Russians who wish to enter the US without a visa travel to Mexico (which doesn't

You say "most Russians" like you hang out with a bunch of Russians all day.

So you're ok with refugees crossing the border, as long as they don't cross at the same place as too many other refugees. Why does that matter?

I'm only ok with it if it's Russians who don't want to fight in the war, but I'm not going to use the word "refugee" to describe them. They deserve the opportunity to exploit our refugee loopholes just as much as the next guy.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: CompuBBS | Ashburn VA | cfbbs.scinet-ftn.org (1:275/99)

You also realize that the Bering Strait is a body of water, right?
Russia is on one side, Alaska is on the other, and multiple islands are
in the Strait itself. This means that putting a wall "around the
straight [sic]" would involve building part of that wall on Russian land and enclosing multiple Russian islands within the wall.

When I say "Wall it up," I mean "enforce the border." Someone should be checking passports on islands. The water should be patrolled. But no worries right now, because right now all eyes need to be on the river surfers in Texas.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: CompuBBS | Ashburn VA | cfbbs.scinet-ftn.org (1:275/99)

On 11 Oct 2022, Aaron Thomas said the following...

That's an interesting take, because it turns out that most Russians w wish to enter the US without a visa travel to Mexico (which doesn't

You say "most Russians" like you hang out with a bunch of Russians all day.

Look it up for yourself. How many Russians have we encountered at our
southern border? How many Russians have we encountered at our other borders?

I don't need to hang out with Russians all day (although there is a very nice Russian bar/restaurant near where I used to work, pre-COVID, that was a
pretty cool place to hang out) to know the facts:

So you're ok with refugees crossing the border, as long as they don't cross at the same place as too many other refugees. Why does that mat

I'm only ok with it if it's Russians who don't want to fight in the war, but I'm not going to use the word "refugee" to describe them. They
deserve the opportunity to exploit our refugee loopholes just as much as the next guy.

If these Russians don't want to fight in the war, then they are seeking
asylum to escape violence, are they not? Even though there is not currently a war in their country? Isn't that the standard you applied to Central-American refugees?

They are not exploiting out refugee "loopholes," and neither are any other refugees. The United States' refugee policies are only "loopholes" because you don't like them.

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

On 11 Oct 2022, Aaron Thomas said the following...

You also realize that the Bering Strait is a body of water, right? Russia is on one side, Alaska is on the other, and multiple islands a in the Strait itself. This means that putting a wall "around the straight [sic]" would involve building part of that wall on Russian l and enclosing multiple Russian islands within the wall.

When I say "Wall it up," I mean "enforce the border." Someone should be checking passports on islands. The water should be patrolled. But no worries right now, because right now all eyes need to be on the river surfers in Texas.

Ah, so now it's a figurative wall, not a literal one.

The vast majority of our border enforcement efforts are indeed focused on the southern border. Including efforts to raise a
symbolic-but-largely-ineffective literal wall.

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

Hello Jeff,

Why were they detained?

Because they were foreigners crossing over the US border without permission
in order to request asylum on US soil.

Innuit are indigenous peoples, not foreigners. As such, they need
no permission from anybody to request asylum on US soil.

They apparently entered Gambell, one of the two villages on St. Lawrence Island, but it's not entirely clear how they got from that point to the involvement of US immigration officials.

Innuit go back and forth between Alaska and Siberia all the time.
Usually by boat and paddle. But some of them are avid swimmers and
make it all the way across without any need for any boat. I could
be those two Innuit were taking a break on St. Lawrence Island and
some US immigration officials took notice.

My guess is that they openly requested asylum and someone got on the phone (or radio) with someone else, and so forth, until it ended up the way that it did.

Why would they have requested asylum when by treaty there was no need?

They were Innuit. By treaty, Innuit can freely travel between Russia
and the USA - without the need of a passport or paperwork of any kind.
All thanks to Reagan and Gorbachev.

If so, then there would have been no need to request asylum.

It is not "if so" but a matter of record.

And yet, they did.

The news media merely assumed such a request was made.

For Life,
Lee

--
If we don't get it / Shut it down!

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Jeff,

Do we need to build a wall in the Bering Strait?

A wall of ice? Please. Don't make me laugh.

I agree that it sounds absurd. But others may have differing opinions.

Polar bears depend on ice to get to and from wherever they want
to go. We do not want to get blamed by the United Nations (or PETA)
for causing the extinction of polar bears.

For Life,
Lee

--
We! Reject! The president-nonelect!

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On 11 Oct 2022, Lee Lofaso said the following...

Why were they detained?

Because they were foreigners crossing over the US border without permission
in order to request asylum on US soil.

Innuit are indigenous peoples, not foreigners. As such, they need
no permission from anybody to request asylum on US soil.

Nobody needs permission to request asylum on US soil. All they have to do is get themselves to US soil. That, in the eyes of conservatives, is the problem.

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

If these Russians don't want to fight in the war, then they are seeking asylum to escape violence, are they not? Even though there is not currently a war in their country? Isn't that the standard you applied to Central-American refugees?

Their country is at war, and they're being forced to take part in it.

A "war" on the streets isn't the same as being forced to murder Ukranian civilians.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: CompuBBS | Ashburn VA | cfbbs.scinet-ftn.org (1:275/99)

On 13 Oct 2022, Aaron Thomas said the following...

If these Russians don't want to fight in the war, then they are seeki asylum to escape violence, are they not? Even though there is not currently a war in their country? Isn't that the standard you applied Central-American refugees?

Their country is at war, and they're being forced to take part in it.
A "war" on the streets isn't the same as being forced to murder Ukranian civilians.

Indeed not. It's much closer to home.

Jeff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

Hello Aaron,

If these Russians don't want to fight in the war, then they are seeking
asylum to escape violence, are they not? Even though there is not
currently a war in their country? Isn't that the standard you applied
to Central-American refugees?

Their country is at war, and they're being forced to take part in it.

How is that any different from the US being at war in Vietnam,
with its people forced to take part in it? Oh, that's different.
Those "draft dodgers" who went to Canada and Sweden and other
places were deserters and should have done time in prison.

A "war" on the streets isn't the same as being forced to murder Ukranian civilians.

Those who served in Vietnam were called "baby killers" - a fitting
description for what had been going on.

"LBJ! LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?"
~ anti-war chant by hippies calling for LBJ's head

For Life,
Lee

--
Laying Pipe Since '88

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Their country is at war, and they're being forced to take part in it.

How is that any different from the US being at war in Vietnam,
with its people forced to take part in it? Oh, that's different.
Those "draft dodgers" who went to Canada and Sweden and other
places were deserters and should have done time in prison.

The people they're being forced to kill are the same people that we're being forced to defend (with our paychecks.) It's a win for us and for Ukraine.

Those who served in Vietnam were called "baby killers" - a fitting description for what had been going on.

It was your people (leftists) who called them "baby killers."

"LBJ! LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?"
~ anti-war chant by hippies calling for LBJ's head

LBJ was also one of your people. His contribution to the exploitation of black voters has inspired other Democrats (Biden, Warnock, Schumer, Pelosi) to take it to the next level (of exploiting black voters.)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: CompuBBS | Ashburn VA | cfbbs.scinet-ftn.org (1:275/99)

Hello Aaron,

Their country is at war, and they're being forced to take part

in it.

How is that any different from the US being at war in Vietnam,
with its people forced to take part in it? Oh, that's different.
Those "draft dodgers" who went to Canada and Sweden and other
places were deserters and should have done time in prison.

The people they're being forced to kill are the same people that we're being
forced to defend (with our paychecks.) It's a win for us and for Ukraine.

The US had a draft during the Vietnam conflict. Rather than signing
up for duty, many Americans fled to other countries in order to save
their own skins rather than fight an unjust war. Today, Russia is
forcing its own people to fight an unjust war, and many countries
are refusing to allow those who are trying to flee Russia to do so.

There is no such thing as a "just" war. War is evil - an exchange
of human lives for real estate. As such, the only losers are those
who play. And yet you and your kind continue to praise them, as if
war is a virtue that should be honored by all.

The Vietnamese defeated the Japanese in WWII. And then Ho Chi Minh
asked the US for help to rebuild his country. President Truman refused
to even acknowledge Vietnam's victory over Imperial Japan.

The French told us to stay out of Vietnam. Did we listen? Nah.
We had better soldiers than them, and would never allow our troops
to get slaughtered by weak Vietnamese troops who had defeated the
Japanese. So we did our thing, stayed ten years longer than we
should have, and wimped back home with our image tarnished.

Those "draft dodgers" were not criminals, but heroes. They knew
an unjust war was never worth fighting, and did the only honorable
thing they could. We should praise them all for their sacrifice.

The Russian "draft dodgers" are also heroes. Fleeing from an unjust
war created by a madman, in the most honorable of ways. Rather than
inflict violence on an innocent people, or amongst themselves, they
choose the path of peace. As should we all.

We should open our doors to each and every one of them, no questions
asked. And keep them wide open for all who choose the same path.

Why are you so scared of immigrants? Especially those who abhor
violence, and war? If you want peace, work for justice. There is
no justice in killing your fellow man, regardless of where he is
from or what language he speaks.

Those who served in Vietnam were called "baby killers" - a fitting
description for what had been going on.

It was your people (leftists) who called them "baby killers."

All warmongers are "baby killers" - and should be called out for it.
Not just by "leftists" but by everyone.

"LBJ! LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?"
~ anti-war chant by hippies calling for LBJ's head

LBJ was also one of your people.

LBJ was a Texan. With a big heart and a loud mouth.

His contribution to the exploitation of black voters has inspired other Democrats (Biden, Warnock, Schumer, Pelosi) to take it to the next level (of exploiting black voters.)

We should all be proud of all civil rights and voting rights
legislation passed during the LBJ era. And continue to expand
upon them.

For Life,
Lee

--
If we don't get it / Shut it down!

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Jeff,

Why were they detained?

Because they were foreigners crossing over the US border without
permission
in order to request asylum on US soil.

Innuit are indigenous peoples, not foreigners. As such, they need
no permission from anybody to request asylum on US soil.

Nobody needs permission to request asylum on US soil. All they have to do is
get themselves to US soil. That, in the eyes of conservatives, is the problem.

Biden has changed that, by executive order. Trump's way of doing
things is a thing of the past.

For Life,
Lee

--
I think they bought a Jeep

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)