...would be for Google to stop marketing and selling android phones in Russia. What Russian companies choose to import from abroad is of no consequence for Google.

Speaking hypothetically; how many here believe that the Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service would have taken a similar action if a Russian company with ties to the Russian oligarchs did the same thing that Google is accused of? Anyone?

This is just one more step in the Russian regimes current plan to control what Russians can do and see on the decadent Western Internet. It's no secret that Putin and his cohort is afraid to loose the ability to control the flow of information in Russia, and thus control what the average Russian believe. The Kremlin fears a possible colour revolution, and a bit of digging shows that they blame Internet sites (easily available on cheap android phones) outside of Russia for kindling that kind of unrest.

The danger is not depressurisation, the danger is damage to the flight control systems, damage to the electrical systems, punching holes in fuel tanks (and probably making a bit of sparking and friction heat while at it), puncturing a landing wheel and the like. There are many, many ways a small hole in a vital part can endanger or even disable a modern airliner. Add to that the danger of a sleep deprived, stressed out person on a red-eye shooting an innocent he believed to be a terrorist, or just that f-ing annoying kid who keeps crying and kicking his seat... Also; seeing as there is no such things as a clear shoot inside the anxiety tube that is an airplane, you are going to hit something (or someone) that would be better off with no holes in it - even if you're firing at a legitimate target.

I much prefer if those who can legally carry check their guns on boarding - over here in Europe at least there used to be (might still be) a strong box up front where you could store such things as guns.

And honestly; if you're so attached to your weapon that you can't be separated from it while flying, perhaps driving might be a better solution for everyone involved?

Provided, off course, that they hadn't mounted the payload NEXT to the exploding external fuel tank... yes, I know doing it that way let you have lighter structure, but it introduced a whole range of problems and failure modes you wouldn't have had if the orbiter had been mounted on top.

If you had read the article, you would have noticed that “the supply chain no longer has the parts to sustain this weapon long term.” This is because the weapon is old and - from a military point of view - obsolete, so spare parts are no longer manufactured. It'll probably be quite a bit cheaper to re-equip with a newer rifle than to re-establish a Lee-Enfield production line - especially considering they are likely to pick an off-the-shelf rifle to equip a rather small force.

Step one: Release a bunch of 'critical' documents by 'mistake'.

Step two: Twiddle thumbs while terrorists / criminals abuse information released in step one.

Step three: Point to attack in caused by step two, argue that DHS should be exempt from FOI Request because 'national security'.

Step four: DHS can do anything they like without the public oversight.

Whoops! Sentences are hard! That invitiation must have been lost in the mail, that is.

Uh, I'm sorry, the invitation to the club meeting where we let "them" into "our ranks".

(hint: Collective accountability is a bullshit philosophy.)

While I can't comment on the third world in general, I saw a lot of solar cell setups for charging cell phones in South Sudan - people even ran solar charging as a business; a solar panel, some car batteries, a black box of electronics and 3 to 5 South Sudanese pound for a full charge.
Also saw plenty of cell towers with solar panels and battery banks, with diesel generators for backup. Not as clean or tidy as plugging into the grid, granted... but it works. Was a life line for me for a year spent down there, and twice so for the people who lives their whole life there.
Just because you can't plug something into a national grid, don't mean you can't get power... often cheaper and more reliable than the grid too - at least in Juba.

"at any employer."

That is why you're not having a problem. If you have employer-provided healthcare, you don't have to worry about preexisting conditions. And now, under Albatrosscare, you don't have to worry about them on the private insurance market either.

Somebody will manage to explain to me why this is bad someday, I suppose, but I sure haven't figured it out yet.

Please tell me you don't think that's a good idea...

By inserting the step of "declaring bankruptcy", it magically changes from "fraud" to "a viable business model".

No, but it is the function of health insurance companies to spread cost (risk) across a large pool. That's sort of what the word "insurance" means...

...or we could spread the (assumedly small) risk that any particular person would contract Nuclear Cancer or whatever, and everybody pays a small fraction of the price proportional to their share of the risk pool.

Gosh, what would that be called?

Oh, you thought any of that was going to stop? You're adorable.

No, the only things that are going to stop are the ones Republicans don't like.

Go home. You're drunk.