An immigration officer who worked for the UK Border Agency managed to get his wife out of his hair for three years by putting her name on the no-fly list while she was visiting the in-laws overseas. Officials confirmed on January 30 that the man had confessed to adding his wife's name to the list after she left for Pakistan, with the result that she was not allowed to get on a plane to come home. Airline and immigration authorities refused to explain to her why she was not being allowed to travel, although I imagine she put two and two together after her immigration-officer husband stopped answering his phone.
As you might expect, the husband was smart enough to tamper with immigration databases but not smart enough to avoid getting caught. Or, at least, it appears that at some point during the three years he forgot he had exiled his wife, and that he had done so by putting her on a list of people considered potentially dangerous. He later applied for a promotion, which required a new background check, which showed that, lo and behold, he was married to somebody on a terrorist watch list. That raised some eyebrows, and the officer then admitted he had tampered with the list.
Immigration Officer Puts Wife on No-Fly List
DNA Lounge: Wherein we pour a floor.
Here are some photos, because you know how I love the construction photos.
Also, this is good news:
Wiener proposes economic study on nightlife
His office has announced that at today's board meeting, Wiener will call for a study of the economic impacts of entertainment and nightlife in the city. "It's important that we understand the size and reach of this industry as we consider regulating it. Without this information, it's difficult to make informed decisions and to enact effective policies concerning entertainment and nightlife, which are a key part of San Francisco's cultural identity. Particularly as we attract more young people to San Francisco, as the biotech and other new economy industries grow here, we need to ensure that we are providing them with entertainment opportunities. Understanding the size and scope of entertainment and nightlife in the City will help us achieve that goal and help us remain a world-class city that attracts people here."
It sounds boring, but the fact that there has yet to be a serious economic impact study of San Francisco's nightlife has been a problem for our side in the past. For example, when someone makes an outrageous statement like claiming that that any possible economic benefit brought to the city by having nightclubs at all is outweighed by the cost of policing them, we don't have a solid number with which to counter that by showing that our number -- how much money nightlife brings to the city -- far outstrips theirs. The reason is that these kinds of studies are very expensive, so no nightclub or nightlife organization has been able to afford one yet. So for the City Controller to conduct the study for us is a good thing.