THAT PORT DEAL

THE U.S. IS STEAMING AHEAD WITH PLANS TO TURN OVER THE SECURITY OF ITS EAST COAST PORTS TO DUBAI. EVEN IF THIS DIDN'T POSE A SERIOUS THREAT TO U.S. SECURITY, IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL, BECAUSE THE U.A.E. BOYCOTTS ISRAEL: See Dubai's Israel Ban Violates U.S. Law (New York Daily News)

BUT DON'T WORRY, THE U.S. IS SNAPPING INTO ACTION AND PUTTING HEAT ON .... ISRAEL.

Israeli firm feels heat over much smaller pact (New York Daily News)
WASHINGTON - While a state-owned Arab company sailed past regulators with its $6.8 billion deal to run six crucial U.S. ports, a private Israeli firm is getting the third degree over a much smaller venture, the Daily News has learned. Dubai Ports World got approval from the Committee on Foreign Investment to buy the British firm that now runs the ports after an investigation that lasted less than 25 days.

That process is required by law whenever a foreign firm wants to buy a U.S. company that might affect national security. If that panel, with 12 agencies led by the Treasury Department, decides there is an issue that needs to be looked at, it goes on to a 45-day review.

That did not happen with DP World. It did with Check Point, on Feb. 13 - just days after DP World was cleared. Check Point is an Israeli Internet security firm that wants to buy Maryland-based Sourcefire, a smaller network security software firm, for $800 million, a purchase already cleared by the Federal Trade Commission. It has a U.S. headquarters in California and branches and clients around the nation.

A Treasury spokesman declined to comment on the Check Point deal, but industry sources were at a loss to explain the different treatment. They pointed particularly to a rule in the Committee on Foreign Investment law that says when a foreign, state-owned company buys a U.S. asset with a role in interstate commerce and security implications, the deeper review must be triggered. ....The different treatment of the two deals has led some to question whether there was favoritism involved.