Monday, November 28, 2022

Crypto lender BlockFi goes bankrupt in aftermath of FTX

Lender BlockFi Inc. filed for bankruptcy, the latest digital-asset firm to collapse in the wake of crypto exchange FTX’s rapid downfall. 

BlockFi said in a statement Monday that it will use the Chapter 11 process to “focus on recovering all obligations owed to BlockFi by its counterparties, including FTX and associated corporate entities,” adding that recoveries are likely to be delayed by FTX’s own bankruptcy. Chapter 11 bankruptcy allows a company to continue operating while working out a plan to repay creditors. 

The petition, filed in New Jersey, lists BlockFi’s assets and liabilities at between US$1 billion and US$10 billion each. The company said in the statement that it had around US$257 million of cash on hand, and is starting an “internal plan to considerably reduce expenses, including labor costs.”

Citing “a lack of clarity” over the status of bankrupt FTX and Alameda Research, the Jersey City, New Jersey-based company earlier halted withdrawals and said it was exploring “all options” with outside advisers.

Following investigations into FTX by the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission over potential misuse of customer funds, it became unclear to BlockFi where funding for a credit line from FTX U.S. and collateral on loans to Alameda, which included Robinhood Markets Inc. stock, came from, Bloomberg News reported earlier this month. BlockFi had also been in the process of shifting over its assets over to FTX for custody, but the majority of the assets had not been moved prior to FTX’s collapse. 

FTX U.S. is listed in the company’s petition as one of its top unsecured creditors, with a US$275 million loan.

The company’s largest unsecured creditor, Ankura Trust Company, is owed about US$729 million, according to the petition. Ankura acts as a trustee for BlockFi’s interest-bearing crypto accounts, according to its website.

“BlockFi’s Chapter 11 restructuring underscores significant asset contagion risks associated with the crypto ecosystem, and, potentially, deficient risk management processes,” said Monsur Hussain, senior director of Financial Institutions at Fitch Ratings. He said that that these restructing processes can be “notoriously lengthy” and noted that creditors owed money by Mt. Gox are only getting closer to be paid eight years after the Bitcoin exchange failed. 

BlockFi’s bankruptcy shares similarities with that of FTX, according to Eric Snyder, partner and chairman of the bankruptcy department at law firm Wilk Auslander. He said in an interview that in both filings, the names of many of the key creditors have not been disclosed, which is unusual in a bankruptcy filing. Snyder also said that it will take a while to determine the total amount of money owed to creditors in both cases.   

BlockFi was founded in 2017 by Zac Prince and Flori Marquez and in its early days had backing from influential Wall Street investors like Mike Novogratz and, later on, Valar Ventures, a Peter Thiel-backed venture fund as well as Winklevoss Capital, among others. It made waves in 2019 when it began providing interest-bearing accounts with returns paid in Bitcoin and Ether, with its program attracting millions of dollars in deposits right away. 

The company grew during the pandemic years and had offices in New York, New Jersey, Singapore, Poland and Argentina, according to its website. Co-founder Prince in a March 2021 interview with Bloomberg said BlockFi was using proceeds from a US$350-million funding round to expand into new markets and fund new products. Bain Capital Ventures and Tiger Global were among the investors in the that round.

Originally valued at US$3 billion in March 2021, BlockFi looked to raise money at a reduced valuation of about US$1 billion in June. The firm also faced scrutiny from financial regulators over its interest-bearing accounts and agreed to pay US$100 million in penalties to the SEC and several US states in February. The SEC is listed on the bankruptcy filing as BlockFi’s fourth-largest creditor, with US$30 million owed to the agency.

BlockFi worked with FTX U.S. after it took an US$80 million hit from the bad debt of crypto hedge fund Three Arrows Capital, which imploded after the TerraUSD stablecoin wipeout in May.

The company had significant exposure to the empire of companies founded by former FTX Chief Executive Officer Sam Bankman-Fried. The company received a US$400 million credit line from FTX U.S. in an agreement that also gave the company the option to acquire BlockFi through a bailout orchestrated by Bankman-Fried over the summer. BlockFi also had collateralized loans to Alameda Research, the trading firm co-founded by Bankman-Fried.

The company is the latest crypto firm to seek bankruptcy amid a prolonged slump in digital asset prices. Lenders Celsius Network LLC and Voyager Digital Holdings Inc. also filed for court protection this year. 

BlockFi sold about US$239 million of its own cryptocurrency and warned almost 250 workers that they would lose their jobs in the run-up to its bankruptcy filing, court papers show. 

The case is BlockFi Inc., 22-19361, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey (Trenton).


The New York Times Is in the Tank for Crypto


There is far too much cheerleading and not nearly enough skeptical reporting.


BY ROBERT KUTTNER
NOVEMBER 28, 2022


JAKUB PORZYCKI/NURPHOTO VIA AP

In a recent post, I noted in passing the oddly soft coverage of the collapse of Sam Bankman-Fried in The New York Times. The Times managed to compare the woes of FTX to a bank run, to blame Bankman-Fried’s competitors for undermining his credibility, and to take his professed charitable intent at face value.

Since I wrote, the Times coverage has only gotten worse.

A piece on the interconnections between Bankman-Fried’s exchange (FTX) and the investment company he controlled (Alameda) soft-pedaled the outright illegality of his making trades with customer funds. To hear the Times tell it, “Alameda’s need for funds to run its trading business was a big reason Mr. Bankman-Fried created FTX in 2019. But the way the two entities were set up meant that trouble in one unit shook up the other as crypto prices began to drop in the spring.”

But that’s not what happened. When customers demanded their money, Fried didn’t have it, because he had been using it and losing it, illegally, for his own trades.

And this: “Alameda’s methods borrowed many aspects from traditional high finance. It was a quantitative trading firm, similar to Wall Street hedge funds that use mathematical models and data to inform decisions. It used ‘leverage’—or borrowed money—to fuel its trades and make bigger returns.”

Note the alibis, and the passive voice. The subhead tells the reader “things got out of control,” as in Nixon’s infamous “mistakes were made.” The comparable Wall Street Journal piece ran rings around the Times version, explaining the interlocks and the sheer illegality.

But the most appalling recent Times piece was their take on SEC Chair Gary Gensler, the one real hero of this whole mess. Gensler was onto the frauds and risks of crypto early, and wise to Bankman-Fried. He was repeatedly lobbied by Bankman-Fried and his allies to lighten up, but to no avail. As our colleague David Dayen wrote on Wednesday, a bipartisan group of members of the House tried to interfere with Gensler’s ongoing investigation.

But to hear the Times tell it, the problem is Gensler. According to the piece, which collects and repeats a medley of inconsistent complaints, Gensler has been both too aggressive and too soft. (“But the collapse of FTX has raised questions about Mr. Gensler’s effectiveness.”) The piece also mischaracterizes Gensler as a onetime enthusiast of crypto, when in fact he was an early skeptic.

The piece even credulously quotes one of the congressmen who sought to interfere with Gensler’s investigations: “‘Reports to my office allege he was helping SBF and FTX work on legal loopholes,’ Representative Tom Emmer, a Minnesota Republican who serves on the House Financial Services Committee, tweeted on Nov. 10 of Mr. Gensler. ‘We’re looking into this.’”

Emmer, who was just elected House majority whip, number three in the GOP leadership, led the letter that tried to get Gensler to back down, in fact. He took $11,600 from FTX employees personally for his campaign, and his work as head of the National Republican Congressional Committee, the election arm of House Republicans, was greatly buoyed by $2.75 million in donations from FTX co-CEO Ryan Salame and the company’s PAC. Emmer, who whined on Twitter about the Prospect’s piece, praised Bankman-Fried a year ago in public testimony, saying, “Sounds like you’re doing a lot to make sure there is no fraud or other manipulation.”

Any of this could have been mentioned in the Times story to give the proper context. None of it was.

If you read the bylines in these several offending pieces, you’ll see that one prime source of the charity toward Bankman-Fried and the hostility to Gensler is a young Times tech writer and cheerleader for crypto named David Yaffe-Bellany. The worst Times pieces are his, though the coverage generally has been too soft.

Yaffe-Bellany wrote the Gensler takedown. Last January, he wrote a piece called “The Rise of the Crypto Mayors,” which should be a major embarrassment to the Times. In it, he touted crypto as a smart way to pay municipal employees. He quoted one gung-ho mayor, Francis Suarez of Miami, as whacking Gensler for not getting with the program.

Yaffe-Bellany is just one writer on a large business staff. Like a lot of tech enthusiasts, he’s just a few years out of school. He was managing editor of the Yale Daily News, and graduated in 2018.

But writers presumably have editors. Why wasn’t some adult at the Times paying attention to the spin?

FTX Donated $1 Million to a Super-PAC Linked to Mitch McConnell in October


(Bloomberg) -- FTX US, a part of Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto empire that catered to American customers, contributed to a super-PAC fighting for control of the Senate in the midterm election just days before the company’s collapse. 

The Senate Leadership Fund, which is aligned with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and was the top spender in the 2022 midterms, received the $1 million donation on Oct. 27, according to its most recent filing with the Federal Election Commission. Only a couple of weeks later, more than a 100 FTX-related companies, including the US arm, filed for bankruptcy, and Bankman-Fried resigned as head of the corporate group. 

The contributor listed on the FEC donation report is West Realm Shires Services Inc. and FTX US is its commercial name. 

The Senate Leadership Fund did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The super-PAC spent $239 million in the midterms on behalf of Republican candidates, according to OpenSecrets, which tracks money in politics.  

While several members of Congress, including Illinois Senator Richard Durbin, a Democrat, and Republican Representative Kevin Hern of Oklahoma have said they would return donations from FTX executives or give the money to charities, there isn’t a requirement in election law for committees to return donations to companies that go bankrupt.

FTX US also gave $750,000 to the Congressional Leadership Fund and $150,000 to the American Patriots PAC, both of which supported House Republican candidates. It gave $100,000 to the Alabama Conservatives Fund, which backed Republican Katie Britt’s successful run for the state’s open Senate seat.

Individual executives at the broader FTX company have given far more money. Bankman-Fried emerged as major donor to Democratic candidates leading up to the Nov. 8 midterm elections, donating most of the $39.4 million that he gave to them, FEC records show. One of his top lieutenants, Ryan Salame, gave $23.6 million -- mostly to Republicans.

As Congress weighs bills that would regulate digital currencies, the crypto industry became a major player in the 2022 election cycle, with industry players donating $84.1 million through mid-October. But most of that amount, some 84%, came from Bankman-Fried and other FTX executives. Committees in the House and Senate have scheduled hearings next month on the firm’s collapse, with Bankman-Fried as a potential witness.

--With assistance from Allyson Versprille.

©2022 Bloomberg L.P.


Dr. Fauci defends China from blame for COVID-19 pandemic — but takes shot at Trump for 'anti-China approach'

CHRIS ENLOE
November 28, 2022

Dr. Anthony Fauci was confronted on Sunday about communist China's alleged cover-up of the COVID-19 pandemic origins.

The director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden responded by taking a shot at the Trump administration.

What did Fauci say?

Speaking on CBS' "Face the Nation," Fauci seemingly defended China's refusal to be transparent, even apparently justifying it because the Chinese are "suspicious" of anyone trying to blame them for the pandemic.

"The Chinese — not necessarily the scientists that we know and we have dealt with and collaborated with productively for decades — but the whole establishment ... even when there's nothing at all to hide, they act secretive, which absolutely triggers an appropriate suspicion," Fauci said.

But he quickly dismissed the possibility that COVID-19 was anything but a "natural occurrence."

"If you look at the examination by highly qualified international scientists, with no political agendas, they've published in peer-reviewed journals that the evidence is quite strong that this is a natural occurrence," Fauci said.

To uncover the origins of COVID-19, then, Fauci said there must be collaboration between China and the rest of the world in a "non-accusatory way," which was a clear shot at former President Donald Trump, who vocally blamed China for the pandemic.

"What happens is that if you look at the anti-China approach that clearly the Trump administration had right from the very beginning, and the accusatory nature," Fauci said, "the Chinese, they're going to flinch back and say, 'No, I'm sorry, we're not going to talk to you about it,' which is not correct."

When host Margaret Brennan noted the Chinese are not cooperating with the Biden administration either — thus suggesting their lack of transparency is not rooted in Trump's "accusatory nature" — Fauci doubled down on his claims.

"I think that horse is out of the barn and they're very suspicious of anybody trying to accuse them," he said.

What else did he say?

In another interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," Fauci was more explicit in denying that China is to blame.

"I don't mean this in a broad pejorative way, but in anything that we've had to do over decades — whether it's bird flu, H5N1, H7N9, or the original SARS in 2002 — even when there's nothing to hide, [the Chinese government] act in a suspicious, non-transparent way just probably because they don't want to make it look like there's a blame," Fauci said.

"When the reality is, if something evolves in your country, it’s not to blame, but let's find out what went on so we can be transparent about it and prevent it for the next time happening," he added.

'Not going to happen': Dr. Fauci mocks

Rand Paul's threats after Republicans

lose the Senate


David Edwards
November 27, 2022

Dr. Anthony Fauci outs Rand Paul for profiting off of attacking him (Photo: Screen capture)

Dr. Anthony Fauci noted that Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) will never be able to follow through with his promise to chair hearings about the pandemic response because Republicans did not gain control of the Senate in the midterm elections.

"There have been all these House Republican calls for investigations into the origins of COVID and saying they're gonna bring you up to Capitol Hill," CBS host Margaret Brennan told Fauci in an interview that aired on Sunday. "Do you think that wanes as you step down?"

"Well, I don't think it's gonna wane for me because they're already saying, the Republicans, that had they won the Senate, they would be bringing me before the committee that Rand Paul would likely be chairing," Fauci said.

"That's not going to happen because the Senate is not in the Republican control. But the Republican House has said that they're going to and that's fine with me," he added. "I'm very much in favor of- of legitimate oversight. Absolutely. I mean, I've testified before Congress, given the 38 years that I've been director, literally hundreds of times, in many oversight hearings."

Watch the video below from CBS or at the link.


human rights are non-negotiable

World Cup pitch invader brings on rainbow flag during Portugal v Uruguay clash
A pitch invader runs across the field with a rainbow flag during the World Cup group H soccer match between Portugal and Uruguay, at the Lusail Stadium in Lusail, Qatar, Monday, Nov. 28, 2022.
 (AP Photo/Abbie Parr)

Jack Rathborn

November 28 2022 09:07 PM

A pitch invader brought a rainbow flag onto the pitch at the Qatar World Cup match between Portugal and Uruguay at the Lusail Stadium.

As well as carrying the pride flag, the fan also wore a t-shirt with a superman logo and the message: “Save Ukraine”.

The back of the t-shirt had the message: “Respect for Iranian Women”.

The Group H match was briefly halted after approximately 50 minutes but soon resumed after Iranian referee Alireza Faghani retrieved the flag.

The World Cup has been hit by controversy throughout in Qatar, where homosexuality is illegal.

FIFA performed a U-turn over its stance to allow fans to wear rainbow items at stadia.

The colours have become one of the tense moments of the tournament, as so many players, officials and fans want to make a gesture of solidarity towards the LGBTQ+ community over Qatar’s laws and culture around homosexuality.

Soccer Football - FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 - Group H - Portugal v Uruguay - Lusail Stadium, Lusail, Qatar - November 28, 2022 A pitch invader runs onto the pitch wearing a t-shirt with a message saying 'Save Ukraine ' during the match REUTERS/Dylan Martinez

Some supporters and media have had items of clothing with rainbow flags confiscated, most notably with security even instructing that bucket hats should be removed.

With federations limited by how they could protest, Germany covered their mouths in statement before their match against Japan.

Germany maintain FIFA “denied us a voice”, adding: “We wanted to use our captain’s armband to take a stand for values that we hold in the Germany national team: diversity and mutual respect. Together with other nations, we wanted our voice to be heard.

“It wasn’t about making a political statement – human rights are non-negotiable. That should be taken for granted, but it still isn’t the case. That’s why this message is so important to us. Denying us the armband is the same as denying us a voice. We stand by our position.”



The moral compass of the FIFA World Cup

The level of criticism on Qatar in the lead up and in the first few days of the World Cup has probably been unprecedented for a global sporting event.
 Published November 28, 2022  

A staggering 5 billion viewers are expected to watch the football World Cup over the course of the next month. It is, by far, the biggest sporting event in the world. On the eve of the tournament, the President of FIFA, the world football governing body, decided to open his press conference with this gem:

“Today I have very strong feelings, today I feel Qatari, today I feel Arab, today I feel African, today I feel gay, today I feel disabled, today I feel a migrant worker.” He then thought it fit to swiftly clarify, “Of course, I am not Qatari, I am not an Arab, I am not African, I am not gay, I am not disabled. But I feel like it, because I know what it means to be discriminated, to be bullied.”

Decipher that at your own peril, but at least there’s some context.

This is the first time the World Cup is being held in the Middle East. It’s also the first time in living memory that the tournament, traditionally held in the summer, is being played in winter, when professional leagues around the world are only half way through the annual season. For those who don’t follow the sport, these are hardly newsworthy developments. But the last few weeks have shown that the implications have been profound.

Bribery allegations

It was way back in 2010 when Qatar won the right to host this year’s World Cup. This was announced simultaneously with the award of the 2018 World Cup to Russia. Soon after the announcement, however, the rumour mill went into overdrive. Serious allegations of corruption and bribery quickly took the gleam off.

Ultimately, FIFA was compelled to conduct an independent inquiry into the bidding process for both world cups. The Garcia Report was submitted in 2014. Although it highlighted a number of questionable transactions, as the New York Times reported, there was no smoking gun. That said, there was plenty of ammunition for future use.

After the eventual publication of the full report in 2017, Russia hosted a hugely successful World Cup only one year later. Some even tipped the tournament as the best ever. The cloud of corruption and foul play had been lifted from the world’s most popular sport. Or so it seemed.

The closer the tournament came to Qatar, the brighter the spotlight became. The debate now shifted from the much maligned bidding process from back in 2010 to workers, women and LGBTQ rights in Qatar.

The level of criticism on these issues in the lead up and in the first few days of the World Cup has probably been unprecedented for a global sporting event. Belgian and Danish kits have been designed to express solidarity with migrant workers and the LGBTQ community. The German team openly recorded their protest on curbs on the freedom of expression by covering their mouths during a team photo. Presenters have also gone to great lengths to make it a point to highlight human rights abuses in their broadcasts. One wonders why. Why is this time different?

Labour conditions

Qatar has had to build extensively at break neck speed to ready for the World Cup — from stadiums and hotels to roads and highways. In order to achieve this, hundreds of thousands of migrant workers from South Asian countries were offered labour on the infamous kafala system, whereby the employer controls the worker’s entry and exit from the country. These migrant workers toiled away for years in abysmal working conditions, facing issues of delayed and deducted wages, extensive working hours without leave and serious occupational hazards.

In 2021, the Guardian reported that over 6,500 migrant workers had died since the award of the World Cup to Qatar. The reports on the number of World Cup job related deaths are controversial in themselves. Amnesty International claims over 15,000. FIFA and the Qatar, on the other hand, say only three! The sharp disparity in numbers is a manifestation of the divisiveness.

The focus on these issues by international organisations and media outlets did, however, lead to some reform. A number of initiatives have been taken by Qatari authorities in recent years, such as the establishment of a tribunal for quick resolution of labour disputes and a fund to support the payment of wages. But critics still lament that this was too little, too late. A big sticking point remains that of remedies, and Qatar’s failure to compensate families of victims who died of natural causes.

LGBTQ rights

Another cause for concern is LGBTQ rights. A tournament like the World Cup, hosting squads and fans from 32 different countries, is a celebration of different cultures. A prerequisite for the host nation is tolerance, even if only for a month, to enable free expression by people from different faiths and backgrounds.

But the Qatari approach towards the LGBTQ community isn’t particularly endearing. A few weeks before kick-off, a Qatari World Cup official referred to homosexuality as “damage in the mind.” Criminal law in Qatar also penalises homosexuality with imprisonment for up to seven years.

This has naturally led to concerns about the treatment of LGBTQ visitors to the country. The Qatari position has consistently been that everyone is encouraged to visit, but local culture should be respected. Make of that what you will, but public displays of homosexuality are clearly laced with peril.

Other, more general, human rights issues faced in Qatar are being continuously raised as well. For instance, critics have commented that women don’t enjoy the same rights as men when it comes to property, inheritance and marriage. Questions have also been posed over the limits on the freedom of expression and the dangerous consequences associated with criticising the state.

All these issues require serious and honest attention. But not only in Qatar and not only this winter.

Why target Qatar?

Pertinent questions were raised, perhaps surprisingly, by Piers Morgan in one radio show, who asked which country is clean enough to host a World Cup if we start using these metrics? He claimed that homosexuality was banned in eight of the 32 playing countries and in several countries in Africa. The United States has reprehensible gun and anti-abortion laws. Russia is guilty of the illegal annexation of Ukraine. The less said about China’s human rights record, the better. Why single out Qatar then?

The one aspect that arguably distinguishes Qatar is the subject of migrant workers.

These workers, suffering as they were, are the ones who’ve put this World Cup together. That makes it rather distasteful to celebrate the occasion without a thought for them. Something like celebrating victory when there are no real winners in the larger scheme of things. To that extent, Qatar stands out.

On a related note, there are also those who contend that politics has no place in sport. When you deep dive into ownership structures, sponsorship deals, broadcasting rights and societal influence of sport around the world, the fallacy of that argument becomes clear. Sportsmen around the world have been steadfast in protesting against racism and social injustice. ‘Sportswashing’ is slowly finding its feet.

Politics and sport clearly have a budding love affair. Let it be that way and use sport for the greater good. That includes using platforms, such as the World Cup to highlight issues that require the world’s attention. But there is no time and place for recording protests and raising human rights abuses. It should be done in Qatar today. And it should be done in equal measure in North America four years from now.


Header image: Shutterstock.com


Lula Da Silva’s Election is a Victory for the World

 
NOVEMBER 28, 2022

Image by Rafaela Biazi.

On October 30th, Brazilians voted in a presidential runoff election that was won by Luiz ‘Lula’ Ignacio Da Silva. It was a victory by the narrowest of margins, although in fairness, the president elect’s opponent had the clear support of the federal highway patrol, which reportedly set hundreds of roadblocks in areas of the country that had supported the former president in the first round of voting.

It was an election with massive stakes, perhaps the most important of 2022 in any country, a vote that, in the best-case scenario, will impact not only Brazil but the whole world, especially in terms of the unfolding climate emergency.

As Brazil controls the largest part of the Amazon region, the fate of the region is in its government’s hands. Under the far-right reactionary Jair Bolsonaro, who has ruled Brazil since 2018, the meager protections in place to protect it were removed, leading to an orgy of both legal and illegal mining and logging and the subsequent encroachment of large agribusiness interests that threaten to transform the region from a forest into a savannah.

A side effect of this activity that the soon to be former president seemed gleeful about was the suffering being visited on what’s left of the country’s indigenous peoples, some of them uncontacted and living in isolation in their territories for centuries.

When climate scientists talk about ‘tipping points’ that could precipitate greater natural disasters in the short term and force average temperatures higher over time, the loss of the Amazon is one of their chief concerns. Preserving it becomes doubly important considering other tipping points are already being reached in terms of glacier melt, the loss of the world’s coral reefs, and other major forests like those in the Congo Basin that are being ravaged out of the view of most media.

President-elect Da Silva, who will take office on January 1st, 2023, will have his work cut out for him and will need global support to protect this natural treasure, with the World Wildlife Fund having just released a report on the dire situation the Amazon faces at the COP27 summit that just ended in Egypt.

As the report’s authors wrote:

“The situation has begun to show signs of nearing a point of no return: seasons are changing, surface water is being lost, rivers are becoming increasingly disconnected and polluted, and forests are under immense pressure from increasingly devastating waves of deforestation and fire.” 

During an appearance at the same conference, Lula reminded the leaders of wealthy nations of a 2009 pledge to provide $100 billion a year to help poorer countries deal with the impacts of climate change that has not been followed through on, saying, “I don’t know how many representatives of rich countries are here; I want to say that my return here is also to collect on what was promised.”

We should start by ensuring that the money is there to help Lula achieve his promise to Brazilians to end deforestation in his country and defend the Amazon. It is in the whole world’s interest to make sure he succeeds.

Derek Royden is a writer based in Montreal, Canada.

Palestine: Statement by the Spokesperson on the Israeli demolition of school in Masafer Yatta

November 28, 2022


The European Union deplores the demolition of the donor-funded Sfai school in Masafer Yatta in the occupied Palestinian territory by the Israeli Defence Forces on Wednesday 23 November. The EU recalls that demolitions are illegal under international law, and children’s right to education must be respected.

This unacceptable development comes while 1.200 Palestinians in Masafer Yatta remain at risk of forced transfer following the Israeli Supreme Court’s decision in May, and against the backdrop of an increasingly coercive and intimidating environment for the Palestinian residents of Masafer Yatta, including the movement restrictions imposed on them, teachers and humanitarian responders.

The EU calls on Israel to halt all demolitions and evictions, which will only increase the suffering of the Palestinian population and further escalate an already tense environment.

White House DEFENDS deal to drill oil in Venezuela and rejects claims Biden is reducing production on American soil - less than a month after President said 'no more drilling'

  • Over the Thanksgiving holiday the Biden administration quietly granted a license to Chevron to resume oil production in Venezuela
  • The move eased sanctions imposed on the dictatorship in 2019 due to human rights violations
  • 'Our expectation is there won't be a lot of oil coming out of there. And it will have to be shipped to the United States,' spokesman John Kirby said  

White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said it is 'not accurate' to say President Biden would rather Venezuela drill for oil than the U.S. and tossed blame to oil companies for not taking advantage of drilling leases. 

Over the Thanksgiving holiday the Biden administration quietly granted a license to Chevron to resume oil production in Venezuela. The move eased sanctions imposed on the dictatorship in 2019 due to human rights violations. 

'Why is it that President Biden would rather let US companies drill for oil in Venezuela than here in the US?' Fox News' Peter Doocy asked Kirby during a news briefing Monday. 

'That's not an accurate take on the president's view,' Kirby said. 

'The president has issued 9,000 permits for drilling on U.S. federal lands, Peter, 9000 of them being unused. There are plenty of opportunities for oil and gas companies to drill here in the United States,' Kirby added. 


'The president has issued 9,000 permits for drilling on U.S. federal lands, Peter, 9000 of them being unused. There are plenty of opportunities for oil and gas companies to drill here in the United States,' Kirby added

He downplayed the move's effect on oil markets. 'Our expectation is there won't be a lot of oil coming out of there. And it will have to be shipped to the United States.' 

'This has nothing to do with a benefit to the climate,' Kirby added when asked about the environmental impact of the move. 

Lifting sanctions came after talks between socialist President Nicolás Maduro, and the opposition Unitary Platform resumed. 

Maduro - who has been sharply criticized for human rights abuses - agreed to allow for a UN-managed humanitarian fund focused on education, health, food security and electricity programs. He also agreed to negotiate with the opposition to hold 'free and fair' elections in 2024. 


Lifting sanctions came after talks between socialist President Nicolás Maduro, and the opposition Unitary Platform resumed


An oil pumpjack is seen in La Canada de Urdaneta, Venezuela

The White House insists the sanctions lift is not related to high fuel prices or the Russian war with Ukraine but is meant to 'alleviate the suffering of the Venezuelan people and support the restoration of democracy,' according to a Treasury Department statement. 

'Allowing Chevron to begin to lift oil from Venezuela is not something that is going to impact international oil prices. This is really about Venezuela and the Venezuelan process,' a White House official said. 

Chevron is the only remaining U.S. oil company in Venezuela. It is part of a joint venture with the state-run oil company there but has been barred by sanctions from operating there. No profits from the sale can go to the Venezuelan state-owned oil company PdVSA but must be used to pay debts to Venezuelan creditors in the U.S. 

Venezuela is home to the largest oil reserves in the world, slightly larger than Saudi Arabia's though its thick tar-like crude is harder to extract. The once-prosperous OPEC nation's hyper-inflationary collapse has led to more than three-quarters of the nation living below the poverty line. 

A record number of Venezuelans are turning up at the U.S.-Mexico border. 

Sanctions on Venezuela began 15 years ago and tightened severely under the Trump administration, which almost completely banned U.S. oil business in Venezuela. 

In March, Biden officials held a meeting with Maduro officials to discuss easing sanctions on oil exports as gas prices surged in the U.S. 

Biden's attempt to appease both climate advocates and Americans concerned about high gas prices has led to a chaotic back-and-forth messaging on his energy policy. 

'No more drilling,' Biden said one month ago, remarks which came only days after he demanded more drilling. 

Biden, while stumping for Gov. Kathy Hochul in New York, responded to a question from the crowd about his promise to stop fracking and new drilling on federal lands and waters. 'No more drilling...there is no more drilling...I haven't formed any new drilling,' he said. 

The questioner pressed him by pointing out there had been new drilling in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico during his administration. 'That was before I was president. We're trying to work on that to get that done,' Biden said.  

But the Biden administration routinely boasts that it has approved 9,000 new drilling permits in its first 22 months in office. Oil industry experts say Biden's regulatory and legislative agenda prevents them from forking over the billions needed to rapidly add more refining capacity. 

On Biden's first day in office, he revoked a permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought more Canadian crude to Gulf Coast refineries. Days later, he issued a moratorium on federal oil and gas leasing, which was later overturned in court. 

Then in October, Biden blamed oil companies for 'war-time profiteering' and threatened them with a new windfall tax if they did not increase their pace of drilling new wells. The attack came by surprise only days after Energy Sec. Jennifer Granholm had met with executives and promised to work with them to find ways to increase diesel output. 

The sanctions relief comes after the Biden administration agreed to pay $1 billion in 'climate reparations' to poor countries impacted by the use of fossil fuels. 

The U.S. now appears to turn back to a corrupt dictatorship after shunning a U.S. ally looking to pump more oil due to climate concerns.  

In the spring, the Biden administration vetoed a $180 million Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) loan to increase energy production in oil-rich developing nation Guyana, an increasingly rare U.S. ally in South America. 

Its reason was 2021 Treasury 'guidance on fossil fuel energy at the multilateral development banks,' which says that the U.S. will 'promote ending international financing of carbon-intensive fossil fuel-based energy.'