Our friend Bob Geiger recently returned from Mexico City. where he discovered a prime example of the Bush Administration’s ham-fistedness at foreign relations:

It seems that in early February, the U.S. Department of Treasury ordered an American-owned hotel in Mexico’s capital city to evict 16 Cuban officials holding meetings on the property because of the 45-year-old American embargo on providing goods and services to the people of Cuba. Bush Administration officials said that the hotel would have been in violation of the U.S. trade embargo of Cuba had it allowed the Cubans to remain, while Mexican officials said the U.S. infringed on their sovereignty and violated Mexican law.

The move enraged Mexican citizens, which resulted in loud protests in front of the Sheraton Maria Isabel hotel, which is owned by Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide.

An official with the Treasury Department confirmed that the Bush administration did indeed pressure the hotel to comply with the U.S. embargo against business with Cuba or Cubans. The meeting was moved to a Mexican-owned hotel the following day after the Cuban eviction on February 3.

Surprise! City officials weren’t happy:

On March 1, Mexico City officials, upset with the U.S. interference, ordered the closing of the hotel which is, ironically enough, located directly across from the landmark, Angel of Independence monument at one of the city’s most prominent intersections. While the official reason for closing the Sheraton was unclear, the official who signed the closing notice, Virginia Jaramillo, the chief of the city’s Cuauhtémoc district, had promised to move against the hotel after the Cuban delegation was asked to leave four weeks before.

We certainly expect foreign companies operating in the United States to obey our laws. They can’t discriminate against women, for example, even if it is perfectly legal to do so in their country. Mexico does not have an embargo against Cuba, so the embargo is not legal in Mexico.

And, as Bob says:”Are we not hated enough in the world right now without our government pulling outrageous acts of anti-diplomacy like this? In this particular case, did the Bush administration even consider whether this was an action worth pursuing given strained diplomatic relations with Mexico over the highly-flammable issue of border security?”

A new law in the Netherlands requires immigrants to pass a cultural entrance exam to ensure that they will accept the country’s liberal cultural values. To help prospective immigrants, the government has produced a short film titled, “To the Netherlands.”

“The film is meant for people not yet in Holland to take note that this is normal here and not be shocked and awed by it once they arrive,” says Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Somali-born member of the Dutch Parliament.

The film sounds like fun:

The film contains images of gay men kissing and of a sunbathing topless woman.

But don’t worry:

[There] is an edited version for people in countries, such as Iran, where possession of such images is illegal.

The test itself:

The 15-minute exam that went into effect March 15 is administrated at 138 embassies worldwide and tests applicants for rudimentary Dutch language skills and information about Dutch law and culture. Potential questions include whether hitting women and female circumcision are legal and where Crown Princess Maxima is originally from (Argentina)…

The more restrictive immigration policies were implemented partially due to the controversy sparked by the murder of Theo van Gogh (great-great-grandson of the painter) as a result of his controversial 10-minute short film Submission about the abuse inflicted on Muslim women. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who wrote the film, also received death threats. Van Gogh planned on making a three-part series about the subject. The second film was to be a treatment of the same issue from the perspective of Muslim men

We should make emigrants to California from Red States take a similar test. Keep out the riff-raff.

With an ally like this … : As a lobby, it is considered more powerful than the AARP and the National Rifle Association. It wields incredible power in the halls of Congress and is so firmly entrenched in the U.S. government that its individual lobbying groups write position papers and even speeches for elected officials.

It’s the “Israel Lobby,” a group of powerful organizations whose sole purpose is to see to it that Israel remains the United States’ biggest recipeint of foreign aid and political protection — at the expense of our relations with Arab nations and the ongoing destablilization of the Middle East. So goes the argument of academics John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt in their just-published paper, “The Israel Lobby,” which begins with this overview:

For the past several decades, and especially since the Six-Day War in 1967, the centrepiece of U.S. Middle Eastern policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering support for Israel and the related effort to spread “democracy” throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardised not only U.S. security but that of much of the rest of the world. This situation has no equal in American political history. Why has the U.S. been willing to set aside its own security and that of many of its allies in order to advance the interests of another state? One might assume that the bond between the two countries was based on shared strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives, but neither explanation can account for the remarkable level of material and diplomatic support that the U.S. provides.

The professors argue very persuasively that Israel is not of strategic importance, is in no danger of being overrun by Arab states, behaves like a terrorist state and spies relentlessly on the United States, the source of $3 billion per year in foreign aid — that’s $500 per Israeli per annum.

Read the short version on the London Review of Books or download the full PDF version.

Archbishop Opposed to Teaching Creationism
LONDON – The archbishop of Canterbury, leader of the world’s Anglicans, says he is opposed to teaching creationism in schools. “And that’s different … discussing, teaching about what creation means,” Archbishop Rowan Williams said in an interview published Tuesday. Judging by that quote, we think either the archbishop was drunk or he was doing an eerily accurate impersonation of George Bush.

Peru Waterfall One of World’s Highest
LIMA, Peru – A German explorer says he’s found one of the world’s highest waterfalls in Peru’s isolated northern jungle. However, in a typical fit of Germanic pique, the explorer refused to say where he found the waterfall or show his photographs to reporters.

Karzai Proposes Sweeping Cabinet Changes
KABUL, Afghanistan – Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah is set to be replaced in a proposed Cabinet reshuffle, an aide for President Hamid Karzai said Wednesday. Among replacements he was considering were Mohammed Mohammed, Ayoub Ayoub and Khalil Khalil, said Karzai, noting that it was “just easier” to have Cabinet members with the same first and last names.

No Radiation From Japan Nuclear Waste Fire
TOKYO – Part of a nuclear power plant in western Japan was on fire Wednesday, but an official said no radiation had leaked. He added that reported sightings of a giant lazer-beam-shooting moth on the outskirts of the city were unconfirmed.

Afghan Convert May Be Unfit for Trial
KABUL, Afghanistan – An Afghan man facing the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity may be mentally unfit to stand trial, a state prosecutor said Wednesday. Looks like the freedom thing is working out pretty well in Afghanistan these days ….

Chavez Says U.S. Already Has Lost in Iraq
CARACAS, Venezuela – Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Tuesday that U.S. troops have been routed by a strong resistance movement in Iraq, but haven’t pulled out because officials in Washington won’t acknowledge defeat. Chavez also said Bemidji State would win the NCAA basketball championship, but that the Bush administration would not acknowledge that either and would name Michigan State the winner instead.

Eight years ago today, March 21, 1998, the first poll came out after Kathleen Willey appeared on “60 Minutes” and alleged that President Clinton had made unwanted advances to her in the White House. Notice how quaint this sounds today:

Americans polled by Newsweek appear to be sharply divided on whether Clinton should remain president if Kathleen Willey’s allegation of a sexual encounter with him is true.

In a survey of 750 adults released today, 49 percent said that even if the president lied, he should stay in office — with or without issuing an apology to the American people.

Yet 43 percent said Clinton should leave office if the allegation is true and Clinton lied about it.

A week after Willey’s appearance on “60 Minutes,” the president’s approval rating dropped to 62 percent, a two-point dip from last month’s Newsweek poll.

In that television interview, Willey said Clinton placed his hands on her breasts, kissed her on the mouth and placed her hand on his genitals during a conversation about her financial troubles. The encounter allegedly took place at the White House in 1993.

Only 37 percent of Newsweek’s survey respondents believe Willey’s allegation — but just 35 percent accept the president’s denial.

The survey also showed 39 percent said Clinton gets away with more than other political office holders, while 58 percent said he gets away with less or about the same as others.

And, 49 percent — 53 percent of them men — said that if Clinton held a job other than the presidency, the sexual behavior allegations against him would have forced him out of his job.

Ah, the good old days.

Hat tip to KO and Countown