By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

Intraday power prices in Germany jumped and natural gas-fired electricity generation rose to a two-year high this week as low wind speeds continue to depress wind power output.

Natural gas use for power generation rose on Wednesday to its highest level since December 2022, as a wider power supply gap had to be filled by fossil fuels amid very weak wind power generation.

Intraday power prices have jumped for the peak Wednesday hours, according to EEX data cited by Bloomberg.

Germany’s power margin, the available electricity supply to meet demand, has dropped this week to the lowest level so far this winter, as low wind speeds and colder weather are straining the power system.

This week, wind speeds in Germany have dipped again, while colder-than-usual temperatures have settled over much of northwest Europe.

Since early November, the so-called ‘Dunkelflaute’, German for “dark wind lull”, have often resulted in wind farms in Europe’s biggest economy generating only a fraction of their nameplate capacity, leading to day-ahead electricity prices for peak demand hours to high levels not seen since the peak energy crisis in 2022.

Near-term power prices have increased as supply has been fluctuating while demand has been growing with the colder temperatures. Germany has had to import more electricity from France and rely more on fossil fuels for power generation during periods of low wind speeds.

The wind speeds will only pick up this coming weekend, according to Bloomberg modeling.

This means that Germany has to grapple with higher hourly power prices and increased gas demand until at least Friday.

Gas-fired power generation in Germany jumped in November from October by the largest-ever monthly increase, according to data from energy think tank Ember cited by Reuters last week.

That was mostly because of the 25% lower wind power generation in October and November compared to the same two months of last year.

US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan is currently on his seventh trop to Israel, and with just weeks left of the Biden administration. The lame-duck US administration is still trying to inject something positive into the news cycle concerning efforts to achieve a hostage and ceasefire deal in war-ravaged Gaza.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “is ready to do a deal” – claimed Sullivan in a Tel Aviv press conference. He was asked about longtime allegations that Netanyahu has actually been stalling and thwarting the potential for a deal.

“No, I do not get that sense,” Sullivan answered. “When I go to Doha in Cairo, my goal will be to put us in a position to be able to close this deal this month… I wouldn’t be here today if I thought this thing was just waiting until after January 20,” he also explained.

“Hezbollah can never again rebuild its terror infrastructure to threaten Israel,” said Sullivan, appearing to take some degree of credit on behalf of the Biden administration. “Now the Assad regime in Syria is gone.”

“The balance of power in the Middle East has changed significantly,” Sullivan declared further. “Israel is stronger, Iran is weaker.”

But as for the potential to secure peace in Gaza, this looks further away just as it’s been for the past many months, despite occasional optimistic sounding headlines to the contrary. The Wall Street Journal in a fresh report has said Hamas has begun conceding to a couple key Israeli demands:

Hamas has yielded to two of Israel’s key demands for a cease-fire deal in Gaza, Arab mediators said, raising hopes of an agreement that could release some hostages within days despite the repeated collapse of previous negotiations.

The militant group told mediators for the first time that it would agree to a deal that would allow Israeli forces to remain in Gaza temporarily when the fighting stops. Hamas also handed over a list of hostages, including U.S. citizens, whom it would release under a cease-fire pact, something it hasn’t done since the first truce in the conflict last year.

The new plan, proposed by Cairo and backed by the U.S., seeks to build on momentum generated by the cease-fire in Lebanon secured in November, which has broadly held despite both Israel and Hezbollah accusing each other of violations. 

So this could actually be a legitimate breakthrough, in the wake of Hamas’ leadership having been decimated (as has Hezbollah’s). Still, in the recent past when the US was claiming to be at the ‘goal line’ of achieving a deal, either side would demand something more, or refuse to make key concessions.

Israeli Defense Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin in 2007: “Israel would be happy if Hamas took over Gaza because IDF could then deal with Gaza as a hostile state”, going on to downplay significance of Iran in Gaza “as long as they don’t have a port.”👉https://t.co/BK696GcVP0 pic.twitter.com/1kAjY6rfTM

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) July 31, 2024

Hamas has until now (apparently) stuck firmly to its demand of a full military withdrawal from the Strip, thus this could actually be the real opening that the sides need. But it remains to be seen whether this will be enough for Netanyahu.

Authored by Liz Heflin via Remix News,

Russia’s Duma passed a bill yesterday banning children who are not proficient in Russian from attending school. The law takes aim at migrant children, who must now pass a Russian language proficiency exam.

The State Duma, which passed the bill 409-1, is the lower house of Russia’s Federal Assembly.

Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin also clarified that migrant children will have their legal status in the country checked, that is, if they are living in the country legally. 

The upper house of Russia’s parliament, the Federation Council, is expected to pass the bill as well, with it set to come into force in April 2025 after President Vladimir Putin signs it into law.

Volodin claimed that 41 percent of migrant children had “difficulty” speaking Russian at the start of the 2024-2025 school year. He also said 14 bills in total have been passed to combat illegal migration this year. 

Putin’s tightening of migration policy is not a surprise after the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attack at a concert at Crocus City Hall in Moscow that left 145 dead and 551 injured. 

Tajikistanis purportedly carried out the IS plan, with mass police raids and deportations of migrants from Tajikistan and other former Soviet Central Asian republics in the wake of the attack.

Just this past June, Islamic terror attacks targeted an Orthodox church in the town of Makhachkala, the capital of Dagestan; a synagogue in the town of Derbent; and a police station in Makhachkala.

In response to this bill, Amnesty International’s Russia Director, Natalia Zviagina, said:

“This bill not only blatantly violates international law, which Russia is bound by, but also the country’s own Constitution, which prohibits discrimination and guarantees everyone the right to free school education. It is a gross display of xenophobia elevated to the level of state policy.”

Read more here…

Authored by Carus Michaelangelo via The Mises Institute,

[Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine, by Scott Horton, The Libertarian Institute, 2024; 690 pp.]

“A fox knows many things, but a hedgehog knows one big thing.” Scott Horton is the liberty movement’s foreign policy hedgehog, endeavoring to convince the American public of one essential truth: the folly of war. But within that sphere, Horton is a fox, weaving an encyclopedic knowledge of various conflicts into an elaborate and convincing tapestry that indicts elites, intellectuals, the military-industrial complex, and—with characteristic vitriol—neoconservatives in pushing the US toward unnecessary wars.

Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine, fits this mold to a tee—not because Horton contorts facts to a preconceived narrative. Rather, because it is often the same people pushing conflict after conflict who, unsurprisingly, resort to the same, well-worn playbook. Horton’s tome is riveting, from beginning to end. Here, I will focus on the early post-Cold War years, since this part of the story is oft-neglected in contemporary debates about the origins of the Ukraine war.

With the closing of the Cold War, and the USSR dissolving, the US faced a crisis of success: what use is the NATO military alliance without the Soviet enemy to align against? More broadly, what grand strategy should the US adopt now that containing communism was obsolete? For neoconservatives, whose answer post-Cold War was benevolent global hegemony, the solution was to adapt NATO. NATO must gradually absorb more European nations, while leaving Russia out in the cold—contained and encircled, in an even worse position than during the Cold War. NATO must expand its mission to keep European peace and expand Western democracy, or wither on the vine.

From George H.W. Bush to today, the record meticulously compiled by Horton demonstrates that US and other Western leaders communicated to Russia leaders and officials that NATO would not expand east—and could even allow for Russian membership in NATO. Various efforts like the Partnership for Peace and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe were promoted to foster this impression that Russia would be included in European affairs, alliances, and institutions, rather than these structures aligning against them. All the while, these same US and Western leaders took virtually the opposite positions internally, with the result that the US willfully misled the Russians. The exact internal and external postures waxed and waned over the years, but this ultimate pattern held firm. This was even though, all along, Russian officials warned about how they and the Russian people would react to NATO advancing east. What we see is, in terms with which Americans are well-familiar, “a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object.”

It began with George H.W. Bush, who promised Mikhail Gorbachev, after the fall of the Berlin Wall as the Soviet Union careened towards collapse, that the US would not take advantage of the situation. This was also reflected in a NATO resolution on June 7, 1991. Bush and his advisors promised that NATO would not expand if the Soviet Union would withdraw and allow German reunification. The 1990 settlement would only specify that the US would not put troops in East Germany, a nuance which Russia hawks have exploited to argue there was no promise not to expand NATO. But this does not fly. Horton asks the rhetorical question: what sense would it make for the Soviet Union to extract a promise not to put troops in East Germany, if the US had a free hand to bring the rest of Eastern Europe into a military alliance? This agreement only makes sense on a backdrop of agreeing not to expand NATO.

The sins of the Clinton years were legion. In the early 90s, the US sent economists from the Harvard Institute of International Development to Russia to enact what came to be called a “shock therapy” economic policy. It was so badly designed and had such poor outcomes that many Russian thought it must be deliberate. Unsurprisingly, this did not dispose ordinary Russians to view the West favorably. Throughout the decade, Clinton and his advisors duplicitously offered Russia promises that a “Partnership for Peace” process would be pursued rather than NATO expansion—and that NATO would lose its military character—all the while planning to expand NATO.

The Clinton administration was heavily involved in the Balkans wars of Bosnia and Kosovo, which present strong cases against “humanitarian” intervention. The result of Bosnia was that NATO proved itself capable of fulfilling a new mission, while the US solidified itself at the head of European affairs, each of which were necessary for subsequent NATO expansion. Kosovo further solidified NATO’s new role on the continent—even intervening in civil wars—while the bombing campaign against Serbia convinced Russians that the US was an aggressive, ruthless great power, who would violate international rules when it suited them. The US engaged in this aggressive war, in violation of the UN Charter, without approval of the UN Security Council (on which Russia sat). So much for the liberal rules-based international order. The US’s frequent remaking of the rules was a frequent complaint of Russia, including during the Iraq War.

Moreover, when Russia went to war with break-away Chechnya, Clinton’s CIA and US allies supported Chechen rebels and separatist mujahideen fighters fighting on Chechnya’s side against the Russians, with the goal to disrupt an existing Russian oil pipeline running through Chechnya. This, too, Putin cited when invading Ukraine. (If this were all not bad enough, Horton shows how the Clinton administration supported the bin Ladenite terrorists in the Balkans wars and in Chechnya. Indeed, more than half of the September 11 hijackers were involved in these wars in the Balkans and Chechnya—often both.)

Putin’s rise was itself a consequence of the Clintonian interventions in the 1990s: from the “shock therapy” economic policy, to helping Yeltsin get reelected in 1996, to Kosovo and Chechnya. As Horton points out, ironically, Putin invoked the Kosovo precedent of intervening in a civil war to “protect” an ethnic minority to justify invading Ukraine. In one stunning example from the Kosovo war, Horton recounted how the Clinton administration ordered the bombing of a Serbian TV station. These actions still influence Putin’s thoughts about the West today. Putin’s strike on a TV tower in Kiev in February 2022 likely called back to that conflict.

The NATO-Russia Founding Act of May 1997 was another milestone in US duplicity toward Russia. It assured that NATO would not deploy nuclear weapons or “substantial” troops to new NATO nations’ territories. Importantly, the Clinton administration misled Russia into thinking the Founding Act would give Russia a genuine role in NATO deliberations—although it would not have a say within the NATO alliance itself—when, in the words of Clinton advisor Strobe Talbott, the US’s view was that “all we’re really promising them is monthly meetings.”

Throughout Clinton’s term, the Clinton administration fed Russia the lie that claimed NATO’s mission was becoming political, rather than military, so agreeing not to expand NATO would be admitting that NATO’s mission was to contain Russia. He even said he would leave open the possibility of Russia entering NATO. But Horton shows they had no intention to do any of this. To make matters worse, in July 1997 NATO and Ukraine signed an agreement that would provide for training Ukraine’s military and improve their interoperability with NATO, and in August 1997 planned a military exercise involving several former Warsaw Pact states and Soviet republics to simulate US military intervention in an ethnic conflict in Crimea.

No, this was not all. The US tried to cut out Russia from Caspian Basin oil by refusing to run a pipeline from Azerbaijan through Russia, pushing it to a Western route through Turkey instead. The US also backed the GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova) grouping to “speed European integration and exclude Russia influence from the South Caucasus,” according to Horton, which Russia strongly opposed, calling it an “Axis of Evil” in 2005. The Clinton administration also violated Bush and Gorbachev’s Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe in 1999, incredulously claiming that the “permanent US military bases in Bulgaria and Romania” were actually just temporary.

The close of the Clinton years began a wave of “color revolutions” in Russia’s backyard. The key thing about these “revolutions” is that they are heavily funded and supported by foreign governments or NGOs, such as George Soros’ groups. Rather than directly or covertly overthrow an existing regime, these organizations operate “above board,” meaning they avoid specifically endorsing candidates—since that would be illegal—and instead fund and assist groups that promote more generic, non-partisan efforts like “democracy.” In context, of course, their activities are geared to “benefit . . . a favored candidate or party.” A favorite tactic is using “parallel vote tabulation” or exit polls, which are used to dispute official election results. The dispute typically spills over into street demonstrations with the goal of ousting the ostensible victor.

The “revolutions” began in Serbia in 2000 with the ousting of Clinton’s bête noire Slobodan Milošević. As Horton sardonically comments, this culminated in the “sacking and burning of the [Serbian] parliament building in what would surely be called a violent insurrection by American Democrats if they had not been behind it.” Numerous other states would be targeted for color revolutions by the US and its Soros-backed NGO allies over the next decades.

Incredibly, this only begins to scratch the surface of these early, post-Cold War provocations toward Russia that Horton documents, let alone the follies and misdeeds that occurred during the George W. Bush presidency and thereafter. Horton has persuasively made the case that the US provoked Russia over the course of three decades, knowing that Russia would respond with hostility toward NATO expansion. Yet, with reckless abandon, US leaders and officials pushed on, achieving their wildest dreams of NATO expansion and setting their sights on what was always their crown jewel—Ukraine. It did not have to be this way, and it still does not. But time is ticking. Defying expectations, President Biden manages to reach new heights of absurdity in his escalatory policy toward Russia, ticking off a box on Zelensky’s deadly five-point “peace” plan. The war cannot end soon enough.

In an interview, QUX Technologies CEO Keith Hanson told Fox News that the death of UnitedHealthcare’s CEO could ignite the “next wave” of the Occupy Wall Street movement.

“It’s the Occupy Wall Street 2.0 at this point where you have the original wave of the ‘everybody gets a trophy’ generation was hitting the real world and suddenly realizing that everybody from their teachers to their professors at college had pretty much lied to them about the way that the real world works,” Hanson said.

The law enforcement trainer continued: “And now I’m starting to see an uptick in the resentment and the vitriol towards corporations and to corporate CEOs. And I guess it would make sense that this is kind of the next wave. I mean, this is basically the proletariat rising against the bourgeois class and taking what’s theirs. And it’s concerning.”

In New York City, posters featuring UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson’s portrait marked with a red X appeared around town, alongside “wanted” images of other top healthcare CEOs.

“Wanted” Poster for Thomas Halloran CEO of Fidelis Care spotted on a parking meter in Chinatown, #NYC

The “wanted” style poster comes with a cryptic warning to multiple healthcare executives that reads “Health Care CEOS Should Not Feel Safe DENY • DEFEND • DEPOSE”

Video by… pic.twitter.com/Ub3zUs0GeU

— FreedomNews.Tv FNTV (@FreedomNTV) December 11, 2024

Wanted posters of healthcare CEOs are being put up in NYC…

👀 pic.twitter.com/cDDlqT3bO9

— American AF 🇺🇸 (@iAnonPatriot) December 11, 2024

NOW: “WANTED” Posters plastered across Manhattan with pictures of insurance company’s CEO’s.
Poster of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson is crossed out. He was recently shot and killed outside of Midtown Hilton hotel by Luigi Mangione.

Video by @olgafe_images @FreedomNTV… pic.twitter.com/zABa4UOs2D

— Oliya Scootercaster 🛴 (@ScooterCasterNY) December 11, 2024

Wanted posters for healthcare CEOs are posted in NYC pic.twitter.com/QHeda76ZvH

— Fly Sistah 🪷 (@Fly_Sistah) December 12, 2024

In Seattle, a construction sign read: “One less CEO, Many more to go.” 

🚧✨ A striking construction sign in East Queen Anne, Seattle, reads: “One less CEO, Many more to go.” We’re asking local authorities how this could happen. What are your thoughts? @komonews pic.twitter.com/M5fZC24djs

— KOMO PHOTOG OLEN (@olenhogenson) December 12, 2024

Hanson disclosed that following the assassination of CEO Brian Thompson last week, allegedly by 26-year-old Ivy League graduate Luigi Mangione, corporate America has been ramping up private security amid fears of copycat attacks.

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

The short headline defining the abrupt, swift end of Syria as we knew it would be: Eretz Israel meets new-Ottomanism. The subtitle? A win-win for the west, and a lethal blow against the Axis of Resistance.

But to quote still-pervasive American pop culture, perhaps the owls are not what they seem.

Let’s start with former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s surrender. Qatari diplomats, off the record, maintain that Assad tried to negotiate a transfer of power with the armed opposition that had launched a major military offensive in the days prior, starting with Aleppo, then swiftly headed southward toward Hama, Homs, aiming for Damascus. That’s what was discussed in detail between Russia, Iran, and Turkiye behind closed doors in Doha this past weekend, during the last sigh of the moribund “Astana process” to demilitarize Syria.

The transfer of power negotiation failed. Hence, Assad was offered asylum by Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow. That explains why both Iran and Russia instantly changed the terminology while still in Doha, and began to refer to the “legitimate opposition” in a bid to distinguish non-militant reformists from the armed extremists cutting a swathe across the state.  

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov – his body language telling everything about his anger – literally said, “Assad must negotiate with the legitimate opposition, which is on the UN list.” 

Very important: Lavrov did not mean Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the Salafi-jihadi, or Rent-a-Jihadi mob financed by the Turkish National Intelligence Organization (MIT) with weapons funded by Qatar, and fully supported by NATO and Tel Aviv. 

What happened after the funeral in Doha was quite murky, suggesting a western intel remote-controlled coup, developing as fast as lightning, complete with reports of domestic betrayals. 

The original Astana idea was to keep Damascus safe and to have Ankara manage HTS. Yet Assad had already committed a serious strategic blunder, believing in lofty promises by NATO messaged through his newfound Arab leader friends in the UAE and Saudi Arabia.    

To his own astonishment, according to Syrian and regional officials, Assad finally realized how fragile his own position was, having turned down military assistance from his stalwart regional allies, Iran and Hezbollah, believing that his new Arab allies might keep him safe.

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) was in shambles after 13 years of war and ruthless US sanctions. Logistics were prey to deplorable corruption. The rot was systemic. But importantly, while many were prepared to fight the foreign-backed terror groups once again, insiders say Assad never fully deployed his army to counterattack the onslaught.

Tehran and Moscow tried everything – up to the last minute. In fact, Assad was already in deep trouble since his visit to Moscow on 29 November that reaped no tangible results. The Damascus establishment thus regarded Russia’s insistence that Assad must abandon his previous red lines on negotiating a political settlement as a de facto signal pointing to the end. 

Turkiye: ‘we have nothing to do with it’

Apart from doing nothing to prevent the increasing atrophy and collapse of the SAA, Assad did nothing to rein in Israel, which has been bombing Syria non-stop for years. 

Until the very last moment, Tehran was willing to help: two brigades were ready to get into Syria, but it would take at least two weeks to deploy them.      

The Fars News Agency explained the mechanism in detail – from the Syrian leadership’s inexorable lack of motivation to fight the terror brigades to Assad ignoring serious warnings from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei since June, all the way to two months ago, with other Iranian officials warning that HTS and its foreign backers were preparing a blitzkrieg. According to the Iranians: 

“After Aleppo fell, it became clear that Assad had no real intentions of staying in power, so we started to engage in diplomatic talks with the opposition, and arranged the safe exit of our troops from Syria. If the SAA does not fight, neither will we risk our soldiers’ lives. Russia and the UAE had managed to convince him to step down, so there was nothing we could do.”

There’s no Russian confirmation that they convinced Assad to step down: one just needs to interpret that failed meeting in Moscow on 29 November. Yet, significantly, there is confirmation, before that, about Turkiye knowing everything about the HTS offensive as far back as six months ago. 

Ankara’s version is predictably murky: HTS told them about it, and asked them not to intervene. Additionally, the Turkish Foreign Ministry spun that President-Caliph Recep Tayyip Erdogan tried to warn Assad (no word from Damascus on that). Ankara, on the record, via Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, firmly denies orchestrating or approving the Rent-a-Jihadi offensive. They may regret this yet, with everyone from Washington to Tel Aviv jumping in to take credit for the fall of Damascus.

Only the NATO propaganda machine believes this version – as HTS has been for years completely supported not only by Turkiye, but also, covertly, by Israel, which was outed for paying salaries to the extremists during the Syrian war, and famously helped rehabilitate Al-Qaeda fighters injured in battle. 

All that leads to the predominant scenario of a carefully calculated CIA/MI6/Mossad controlled demolition, complete with a non-stop weaponizing flow, Ukrainian training of takfiris on the use of FPV kamikaze drones, and Samsonites full of cash bribing high-ranking Syrian officials. 

New Great Game reloaded

The Syrian collapse may be a classic case of “extending Russia” – and also Iran, when it comes to the all-crucial land bridge that connects it with its allies in the Mediterranean (the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance movements). Not to mention sending a message to China, which, for all its lofty “community of a shared future” rhetoric, had done absolutely nothing to help in the reconstruction of Syria. 

On the geo-energy level, now there are no more obstacles to the resolution of an epic Pipelineistan saga – and one of the key reasons for the war on Syria, as I analyzed it nine years ago: building the Qatar–Turkiye gas pipeline through Syrian territory to provide Europe with an alternative to Russian gas. Assad had rejected that project, after which Doha helped fund the Syrian war to depose him.

There’s no evidence that key Persian Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and UAE will gleefully accept Qatar’s geoeconomic stardom if the pipeline is built. For starters, it needs to run through Saudi territory, and Riyadh may no longer be open to that. 

This burning question connects to a pile-up of other questions, including, with the Syrian gateway all but gone: how will Hezbollah receive weapons supplies in the future, and how will the Arab world react to Turkiye trying to go full Neo-Ottoman?   

Then there’s the thorny case of BRICS partner-state Turkiye directly clashing with top BRICS members Russia, China, and Iran. Ankara’s new turn may even end up causing it to be rejected by BRICS, and not granted a favorable trade status by China. 

While a case can certainly be made that losing Syria may be devastating for Russia and the Global Majority, hold those horses – for now. In the event of losing the port of Tartous that the USSR-Russia has run since 1971, alongside the Hmeimim air base – and thus being ousted from the Eastern Mediterranean – Moscow would have replacing options, with different degrees of feasibility. 

We have Algeria (a BRICS partner), Egypt (a BRICS member), and Libya. Even the Persian Gulf: that, incidentally, could become part of the Russia–Iran comprehensive strategic partnership, to be officially signed on 25 January in Moscow by Putin and his Iranian counterpart President Masoud Pezeshkian. 

It’s extremely naïve to assume that Moscow was caught by surprise by the staging of an alleged Kursk 2.0. As if all Russian intel assets – bases, satellites, ground intel – would not have scrutinized a bunch of Salafi-Jihadis for months assembling an army of tens of thousands in Greater Idlib, complete with a tank division.   
So it’s quite plausible that what’s being played is classic Russia, combined with Persian guile. It didn’t take long for Tehran and Moscow to do the math on what they would lose – especially in terms of human resources – by falling into the trap of supporting an already enfeebled Assad in yet another bloody, protracted ground war.  Still, Tehran offered military support, and Moscow, air support, and negotiations scenarios till the very end.

Now, the whole Syrian tragedy – including a possible Caliphate of all-Sham led by reformed, minority-hugging jihadist Abu Mohammad al-Julani – falls into the full managing responsibility of the NATO/Tel Aviv/Ankara combo. 

They are simply not prepared to navigate the ultra-complex tribal, clannish, embedded in corruption Syrian matrix – not to mention the magma of 37 terror outfits only kept together, so far, by the tiny glue of ousting Assad. This volcano will certainly explode in their collective faces, potentially in the form of horrendous internal battles that may last at least a few years.   

Syria’s northeast and east are already, instantly, mired in total anarchy, with a multitude of local tribes bent on keeping their mafioso schemes at all costs, refusing to be controlled by a US–Kurd Rojava composite that is largely communist and secular. Some of these tribes are already getting cozy with the Turk-supported Salafi-jihadis. Other Arab tribes had this year joined forces with Damascus against both the extremists and Kurdish secessionists.    

Western Syria may also be anarchy territory, as in Idlib: bloody rivalry between terror and bandit networks, between clans, tribes, ethnic groups, and religious groups regimented by Assad, the panorama even more complex than in Libya under former President Muammar al-Gaddafi. 

As for the Head-Choppers’ supply lines, they will inevitably be stretched – and then it will be easy to cut them off, not only by Iran, for instance, but also by the NATO wing via Turkiye/Israel when they turn against the Caliphate, as they invariably may if the latter’s abuses become too media-apparent.   
No one is able to foresee what will happen to the carcass of Assad-dynasty Syria. Millions of refugees may return, especially from Turkiye, which Washington has for years tried to prevent to protect its “Kurdification” project in the north – but at the same time, millions will flee, terrified by the prospect of a new Caliphate and a renewed civil war.

Is there a possible ray of light amongst such gloom? The leader of the transition government will be Mohammad al-Bashir, who was, until recently, the prime minister of the so-called Syrian Salvation Government (SSG) in HTS-ruled Idlib. An electrical engineer by training, Bashir added a further degree to his education in 2021: Sharia and law.

Losing Syria should not mean losing Palestine 

The Global Majority may be mourning what, on the surface, looks like a nearly lethal blow against the Axis of Resistance. Yet there’s no way Russia, Iran, Iraq – and even thunderously silent China – will let a NATO-Israel-Turkiye-backed Salafi-jihadi proxy army prevail. Unlike the collective west, they are smarter, tougher, infinitely more patient, and consider the contours of the Big Picture ahead. It’s too early; sooner or later they will start rollin’ to prevent western-backed jihadism from spilling into Beijing, Tehran, and Moscow.  

Russian foreign intel agency Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedki (SVR) now has to be monitoring 24/7 what will be the next destination of the large cross-Heartland Salafi-jihadi brigade in Syria, overwhelmingly Uzbeks, Uighurs, Tajiks, and a sprinkle of Chechens. There’s no question they will be used to “extend” (US Think Tankland terminology) not only Central Asia but the Russian Federation. 
Meanwhile, Israel will be overstretched in the Golan. The Americans will temporarily feel safe and secure around the oil fields from which they will keep stealing Syrian oil. These are two ideal latitudes for the start of what would be the first concerted BRICS retaliation against those who are unleashing the First BRICS War.  

Then there’s the ultimate tragedy: Palestine. A massive plot twist took place right inside the venerable Umayyad mosque in Damascus. The NATO-Israeli-Turk Head-Chopping Army is now promising the Palestinians they are coming to liberate Gaza and Jerusalem. 

Yet until this past Sunday, it was all “We love Israel.” The MC of this PR op – designed to fool the Muslim world and the Global Majority – is none other than the Caliph of al-Sham himself, Julani.

As it stands, the new regime in Damascus will be, for all practical purposes, backed by those who support and engineer Eretz Israel and the genocide of Palestine. It’s already out in the open, coming from Israeli cabinet officials themselves: Tel Aviv ideally would love to expel the population of Gaza and the West Bank to Syria, though Jordan is their preferred destination.

This is the battle to focus on from now on. The late Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah was adamant when he insisted on the deeper meaning of losing Syria: “Palestine would be lost.” More than ever, it’s up to a Global Resistance not to allow it. 

Authored by Egon von Greyerz via vongreyerz.gold,

As we approach what usually should be a blissful holiday period, the treacherous path the world is now on does not bode well for 2025 and beyond.

Two global crises will dominate the world for at least several years and possibly decades.

FINANCIAL CRISIS

The crisis I have been discussing and writing about for many years is the end of the current monetary era, especially in the West. The exponential growth of debt, which we have experienced since 1971 when Nixon closed the gold window, is reaching an uber-exponential phase in the current century with runaway deficits and debt. 

The likely course of events is unlimited money printing to counter an uncontrollable debt crisis. This leads to monetary debasement, high inflation or hyperinflation, which eventually turns into a deflationary collapse of the financial system and depression. 

THERE CAN BE NO CLEARER SIGN OF THE END OF AN ECONOMIC ERA THAN WHEN THE RESERVE CURRENCY DECLINES BY 99%.  

A possible alternative would be that the financial system implodes before the money printing has taken effect, with a subsequent deflationary implosion. This would mean a period without functioning banks and money. 

As this is the way every monetary system has ended in history, without fail, anyone questioning this inevitable outcome will be entirely wrong. It is only a question of when, not if. 

As the Austrian economist von Mises said:

As always in history, an economic crisis always goes hand in hand with political or geopolitical turmoil. 

When a country spends money it doesn’t have, starting a war is the most convenient way of creating new paper money, which, of course, has ZERO intrinsic value. 

Expanding credit or printing money does not create economic value, but buys time.

Money printing also buys votes. Reelection is the primary objective of any government in a democratic system.

Consecutive US governments have increased US Federal debt almost every year since the early 1930s. 

The current deficit is over $2 trillion, and tax revenue is only $5 trillion. With over $7 trillion in federal spending, the US government needs to borrow another 40% on top ($2T) to make ends meet.

I created the graph below in November 2016, when Trump was elected the 45th President of the United States. I forecast that 8 years later (whoever was president), the debt that Trump inherited ($20 trillion) would be $40 trillion in early 2025. I based the forecast on a simple extrapolation. Since 1981, US debt has, on average, doubled every 8 years. Well, the debt will probably not reach $40T by 20 January 2025, but still, it went up by $16T rather than the $20T that I forecast. 

More importantly, as the graph below shows, debt has increased 44X since 1981, but tax revenue has only increased 6X to $4.9T.  

Can anyone explain how this debt will be repaid? The standard reply is that governments don’t need to repay their debt. 

Well, let me again cite history, which is such a useful empirical tool. 

Throughout history, a country which has not repaid its debts has, without fail, always defaulted, and the currency has gone to ZERO. 

No one must believe that it will be different this time!

A monetary crisis at the end of a major cycle leads to economic collapse, poverty and misery. 

However, this current financial cycle is already developing in parallel with a geopolitical crisis of a magnitude and scale that could be greater than those of WWI and WWII. 

GEOPOLITICAL CRISIS 

The financial and geopolitical conflicts are clearly linked. As in many armed conflicts, the US has been involved since WWII, although the country is not directly threatened.

This has been the case in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine. 

Most of these wars are about fear of losing the US hegemony. The US government subscribes to the 1904 Mackinder theory that whoever controls the Heartland controls the world. The Heartland is the area of Eastern Europe stretching to the Yangtze River in the east and the Himalayas in the south. This area has massive natural resources. 

Syria probably just fell to opposition groups backed by Turkey in an attack supported by the US military. Interestingly, the latest conflict started the same day as the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. Clearly, it’s not a coincidence. 

So Turkey, which for a while has ridden two horses, a Russian and an American, has now taken the US side. 

Turkey is a NATO member and also a prospective BRICS member, among others, Russia, China, Iran and India. 

With Turkey now on the US side and against Russia, we see the first military conflict between the West and BRICS.  

Nobody knows if Syria will regroup again with Assad in Moscow and the soldiers deserting the army. For the Russia – Iran axis, Syria is strategically critical. But Russia cannot win that war with just air power and most probably does not want to divert resources from Ukraine. 

Thus, we now have yet another crisis in the Middle East, a situation with dire consequences for the area and the world.

So we are likely to see continued war in Syria, with anarchy and the rise of more jihadist groups. 

As Thanassis Cambanis, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, said: “In the best case scenario, Syria’s factions will struggle for primacy through contained local battles. At the other extreme, the collapse will spur a renewed period of total warfare in which factions target civilians.”

So, it is likely that more Syrian people will be homeless and migrate to Europe and the US. As we know, no Western country has the capacity to take care of these people, so again, another humanitarian catastrophe has hit the world. 

Losing access to Syria and the Mediterranean has weakened Iran, which will look for other options. The danger has always been that Iran blocks the Strait of Hormuz, which would lock in 24% of global oil. The US could not stop this. It would lead to oil prices at least doubling or more and a major global depression. 

The UAE (United Arab Emirates), which includes Dubai, is right by the Strait of Hormuz. 

Personally, I have always been surprised that so many people move to and invest in Dubai, given the major geopolitical risk that this area carries.

The world is in a severe war cycle, which, at best, will include insoluble and intractable wars in the Middle East and Eastern Europe with both the US and Russia involved. And at worst, a nuclear war.

I was always of the opinion that the Ukrainian conflict is a war Russia is very unlikely to lose. And neither the US nor European NATO troops have sufficient resources to win a war with boots on the ground. 

Russian missiles are currently superior, but anything can happen in a nuclear conflict.

In a nuclear war, there is no winner, and that could be the end of the world, so it is not worth speculating about the outcome of such a war.

THE TRIUMPH OF DEATH

Peter Bruegel painted the “Triumph of Death” in 1562. 

Currently, the world, and especially the West, is on a path to geopolitical and economic destruction.

No one knows how this will end. Even if it takes years, the world is unlikely to be the same once these two cycles have run their course. 

I have already stated that the end of the current economic cycle will be devastating for the world but bearable relative to the worst outcome of the war cycle. 

I had a hope that Trump would settle the Ukrainian situation if the US Neocons didn’t manage to escalate it severely before January 20. 

However, the Middle East conflict, with Iran involved, makes the situation much more complex, even with Trump’s best intentions. 

I always believe in finding solutions, but it is hard to be optimistic when the two Cycles of Evil prevail so strongly. 

At least anyone who has savings should take action to protect these against the coming implosion of financial assets. 

MARKETS

Stocks in the US are massively overvalued. 

The Buffett Indicator, US Stocks to GDP, is at 208%, an all-time high.

Just a normal correction would be a 50% to 75% fall.

The Price Earnings Ratio of Nasdaq stocks is 49X. 

A decline of at least 80%, like in the early 2000s, is likely. 

Obviously, bubbles can always grow bigger before they implode. 

However, the risk of a market collapse sometime in the next few months is extremely high.

Inflation will rise rapidly, as will interest rates, driven by money printing. 

The US 10-year treasury will greatly exceed 10%, as in the 1970s. 

WEALTH PRESERVATION 

Finally, gold will continue to reflect the destruction of the dollar and most currencies. 

Gold in US dollars is up 10X in this century. It is likely to rise by multiples from here as money dies. I explain why in this article: THE CASE FOR GOLD IS INCONTROVERTIBLE.

Gold must be held in physical form and outside the financial system with direct access to your gold. And preferably in a safe jurisdiction outside your country of residence. 

Finally, especially in periods of crisis, helping others and having a close circle of family and friends is more important than all the gold in the world. 

Via The Mind Unleashed,

Hidden for centuries, a forgotten chapter of the Bible has emerged from the shadows of history. Researchers, armed with ultraviolet light and meticulous scholarship, have uncovered a 1,750-year-old text that offers a fresh glimpse into the evolving nature of scripture. This find isn’t just a historical curiosity; it’s a profound insight into how faith and tradition were shaped in early Christianity.

Preserved in an ancient Syriac manuscript, the chapter challenges long-held assumptions about biblical texts and their seemingly static nature. With its subtle variations and expanded narrative, this rediscovery raises compelling questions: What does this mean for the modern understanding of faith? And how many more hidden chapters might still be waiting to be found?

Unearthing a Lost Piece of Biblical History

In a groundbreaking intersection of technology and ancient history, scholars have uncovered a hidden chapter of the Bible within a 1,750-year-old Syriac manuscript preserved in the Vatican Library. Using ultraviolet (UV) light, researchers revealed traces of erased writing—a palimpsest—buried beneath layers of overwritten text. This painstaking process illuminated an earlier version of scripture, lost to time but now reintroduced to the world.

The manuscript, part of the Syriac translations of the Bible, is more than just a relic. It represents a key moment in Christianity’s history, when scribes worked tirelessly to preserve scripture under challenging conditions. Early Christians relied on Syriac texts to disseminate their teachings across cultural and linguistic boundaries, making this find a window into their lived experiences.

What makes this discovery especially remarkable is its collaborative nature. Historians, linguists, and scientists pooled their expertise to decode the faded script, each stroke of ink offering clues to a story untold for nearly two millennia. This isn’t just a triumph for biblical studies; it’s a testament to the enduring power of curiosity and innovation to uncover humanity’s shared past.

The Hidden Chapter: What We Know So Far

The newly unveiled chapter offers an expanded version of Matthew 12, a passage where Jesus and his disciples are criticized for picking grain on the Sabbath. In this version, subtle textual variations bring fresh theological nuances to light, emphasizing compassion and mercy over rigid observance of religious laws. While the core message aligns with established teachings, these differences hint at the dynamic and adaptive nature of early Christian scripture.

Written in ancient Syriac, one of the earliest languages used to transmit biblical texts, the chapter provides a rare glimpse into Christianity’s early cultural diversity. Syriac was instrumental in spreading scripture beyond its Jewish origins, tailoring messages to resonate with varied linguistic and cultural communities. This adaptation reflects the pragmatic approach of early Christians, who shaped their sacred texts to meet the needs of a rapidly growing faith.

What’s particularly striking is the role of early scribes. Far from being passive transcribers, they actively engaged with the material, reinterpreting and preserving it in ways that reflected their own spiritual and societal realities. This hidden chapter, with its emphasis on mercy, reveals a faith not rigidly bound to dogma but alive with reinterpretation and evolution—a window into the beliefs and priorities of communities navigating the complexities of their time.

The Technology That Unveiled the Forgotten Chapter

It’s hard to believe that something written almost 2,000 years ago could still be hiding in plain sight. But that’s exactly what happened here. Using ultraviolet light, researchers managed to reveal a forgotten chapter of the Bible, hidden beneath layers of overwritten text on an ancient manuscript. It’s like uncovering a secret message written centuries ago, invisible to the naked eye but waiting to be found.

The process wasn’t exactly a walk in the park. Think about it—this manuscript is old, fragile, and irreplaceable. Every move had to be precise, every scan done with the utmost care. Months of work went into piecing together faint traces of erased ink, with experts from all over—historians, linguists, scientists—working side by side. It’s amazing to think that this discovery wouldn’t have been possible even a few decades ago. The tools they used, like UV imaging, are giving us new ways to see the past in ways we never thought possible.

But here’s what really gets you thinking—what else is out there? If something as groundbreaking as a hidden chapter of the Bible can be uncovered, what other secrets might still be lying in wait? This is more than a cool tech story; it’s a reminder that history always has more to give, as long as we keep asking the right questions.

A Manuscript’s Journey Through Time

Think about this for a second: early Christians lived in a world where their beliefs could literally get them killed. Their sacred texts weren’t just important—they were lifelines, hidden and protected at all costs. That’s the world this 1,750-year-old Syriac manuscript comes from. Imagine scribes painstakingly copying and preserving these words, knowing the risks they faced if they were caught.

Back then, parchment wasn’t exactly easy to come by. It was expensive, rare, and, honestly, every bit as valuable as the words written on it. To make the most of it, scribes would scrape off old texts and reuse the material—creating what we now call palimpsests. It’s kind of wild to think that their recycling efforts accidentally preserved traces of history that they probably thought were gone for good.

Here’s another fascinating detail: this manuscript is written in Syriac. It’s one of the earliest languages used to spread Christianity and shows how the faith started to move beyond its Jewish roots. Syriac wasn’t just a language—it was a tool that helped Christianity adapt and grow, reaching new communities and cultures. That’s what makes this discovery so powerful. It’s not just about words on a page; it’s about the lengths people went to protect and share their beliefs.

And now, centuries later, we’re uncovering their story. You can almost picture the hands that wrote and rewrote this text, working in secret, determined to pass on what they believed mattered most. It’s a humbling reminder of just how much history can hide beneath the surface—literally—and how much these ancient voices still have to say.

What Scholars Are Saying: A New Lens on Scripture

This hidden chapter of the Bible has sparked lively debates among scholars. Many see it as a fascinating window into how early Christian communities understood and adapted scripture. The chapter’s emphasis on mercy over strict adherence to religious laws aligns with Jesus’ teachings but adds a fresh perspective to familiar passages. This nuance suggests early Christians may have tailored scripture to address the unique challenges of their time.

At the heart of the debate is the question of why this chapter was erased. Some scholars suggest it might have been excluded as church leaders worked to formalize the biblical canon, streamlining texts to unify doctrine. Others argue that its omission could simply reflect the practical realities of the time, with scribes overwriting older texts due to the scarcity of parchment. Whatever the reason, the discovery underscores the dynamic and evolving nature of early Christianity.

Ultimately, this find is about more than one chapter. It’s a reminder that the Bible, far from being a static document, was shaped over centuries by human hands and decisions. For scholars and believers alike, the chapter offers a chance to reexamine the past while raising new questions about the stories still waiting to be uncovered.

Hidden Truths, Endless Possibilities

The discovery of this hidden Bible chapter is more than a historical footnote—it’s a vivid reminder of how much the past still has to teach us. From the resilience of early Christian communities to the evolving nature of scripture itself, this find opens a window into a world where faith and history were deeply intertwined. It also shows how modern technology can breathe life into ancient artifacts, revealing secrets thought lost to time.

But this is likely just the beginning. Who knows what other forgotten chapters, erased writings, or hidden narratives are still waiting to be uncovered? Each discovery invites us to ask new questions, challenge old assumptions, and deepen our understanding of the stories that have shaped human history. Whether it’s faith, curiosity, or a little of both driving the search, one thing is certain—history still has plenty of mysteries left to share.

Billionaire venture capitalist Marc Andreessen gave a wide-ranging interview to Free Press’s Bari Weiss, confirming his involvement with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and sharing behind-the-scenes insights on working with President-elect Donald Trump. Andreessen discussed his role in assisting Trump with assembling the next administration and provided a glimpse into what it’s like to spend time with the incoming commander-in-chief. During the two-hour conversation, Andreessen also revisited his experience with Biden administration officials, claiming the government expressed the orwellian desire to take “complete control” over AI development in the United States. 

“I’m an unpaid volunteer,” Andreessen said when asked by Weiss about his reported involvement. A recent report from The Washington Post revealed that Andreessen, along with fellow Silicon Valley titans Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, is contributing to the ambitious program. Andreessen outlined DOGE’s two chief objectives: slashing spending and reducing regulations.

.@pmarca tells @bariweiss he’s an “unpaid volunteer” for @DOGE: “They are going to cut as much costs as they possibly can and do the same thing for regulations.” pic.twitter.com/fpSmDiIBU7

— CAPITAL (@capitalnewshq) December 10, 2024

“There’s basically two big parts to it,” Andreessen explained. “One is they’re going to do a top-to-bottom review of government spending, and they’re going to cut as much cost as they possibly can. They have a whole theory and strategy on that.”

“In conjunction with that and related to it, they’re going to do the same thing for regulations,” the billionaire continued. “They’re going to do a top-to-bottom review of the regulatory—what they call the regulatory state or the administrative state.”

“The connective tissue there, that they don’t talk about in public, is actually quite important. A lot of the reaction of the Doge from institutional Washington is like, well, that’s impossible, you can’t do that; there are all these laws, statutes, and regulations,” he added.

Andreessen, along with his A16z co-founder Ben Horowitz, endorsed Trump during the final stretch of the 2024 election. Since Trump’s victory, Andreessen revealed to Weiss that he has spent a great day of time at Mar-a-Lago and the Palm Beach area, assisting the 47th leader of the free world with assembling his administration.

While Andreessen said he has spent “maybe half [his] time” at Mar-a-Lago since the election, he is quick to clarify his position:

“I’m not claiming to be in the middle of all the decision-making, but I’ve been trying to help in as many ways as I can,” the tech titan told Weiss. Andreessen explained that his contributions focus on areas where his expertise aligns with Trump’s agenda, including tech policy, business, and economic development. “When I talk about these things, it’s around, as I said, tech policy, business, economics, and then, you know, the health of the country, the success of the country,” he noted.

Andreessen shared his observations of Trump’s warm personal approach, highlighting qualities that he believes are often overlooked by his Democrat critics.

“Everybody says this who meets with him, but he’s an incredible host,” Andreessen remarked. “For however people think, whatever, he’s an incredible host. He runs his own private worlds.”

What stood out most to Andreessen was Trump’s ability to connect with people from all walks of life.

“He treats everybody the same and talks to everybody,” Andreessen said. “He will happily talk to distinguished visitors about who the Vice President should be, and then he’ll ask the caddy.”

Reflecting on his involvement in the transition process, Andreessen noted the exceptional caliber of candidates he encountered. “The caliber of a lot of the people that I’ve met has been very high,” he said, adding that recent appointments, particularly at the next level down in staff positions, have included “very impressive people.”

.@pmarca tells @bariweiss he’s helping Trump team vet candidates for administration roles, noting caliber is “very high” and better than previous term. pic.twitter.com/Obtd8sqvrF

— CAPITAL (@capitalnewshq) December 10, 2024

Addressing concerns about whether qualified individuals might hesitate to join a Trump administration due to the controversies surrounding his previous term, Andreessen said he has observed the opposite trend: “I think the flow of qualified people from outside the system now is actually much stronger.”

Yet another mainstream media narrative busted.

Addressing also reiterated that his support for Trump stemmed from a series of “horrifying” meeting in which Biden officials expressed plans to control AI.

“They said, look, AI is a technology basically that the government is going to completely control,” Andreessen revealed. The officials explicitly discouraged the idea of entrepreneurial ventures in AI, stating, “Don’t start, don’t do AI startups… it’s not something that we’re going to allow to happen.”

Marc Andreessen (@pmarca) says he attended “absolutely horrifying” meetings where Biden’s government vowed to take “complete control” over AI technology:

“They basically said AI is going to be a game of 2 or 3 big companies working closely with the government… We’re going to… pic.twitter.com/REjkfgJkyV

— Honestly with Bari Weiss (@thehonestlypod) December 10, 2024

According to the billionaire, the officials conveyed that AI innovation would be concentrated among “two or three big companies… working closely with the government,” with startups effectively barred from the space. “We’re going to basically wrap them in a government cocoon, protect them from competition, control them, and dictate what they do,” Andreessen paraphrased, highlighting the stark divergence from the open-market approach that has historically driven tech innovation.

By Peter Romeo of Restaurant Business,

The City Council of Los Angeles is scheduled to consider a proposal on Dec. 11 to raise the minimum wage for workers employed in the restaurants at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) to $30 an hour.

The initiative slated for consideration calls for increasing the minimum wage to $25 an hour no later than six months after traffic in the airport resumes the levels of 2019, or before air travel dropped precipitously because of the pandemic. That threshold is expected to be reached possibly this year, meaning the increase would come in 2025.

The minimum would then rise by $1 every July until the pay floor reaches $30 an hour.

The minimum permissible wage for the workers is currently $19.25.

Hotel employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement hammered out with the city during the first quarter of 2024 would also be eligible for the raises. The trigger for those workers would be hitting the occupancy rate enjoyed by city hotels in the pre-pandemic days of 2019.

Workers in several dozen hotels would be affected.

The Airport Restaurant & Retail Association, a trade group for airport concessionaires, called the proposal “a bridge too far.” It noted that the proposed increases would amount to a 56% wage hike over a four-year period for the eligible employees.

According to the association, the wages of airport-restaurant employees have been soaring. The lift is coming in part because of the additional challenges someone working in an airport restaurant is forced to address. For instance, their trip to work can easily take 45 minutes because they have to traverse the airport and contend with security screenings. Someone working in a streetside facility may need only 10 minutes to get to the job, the group stressed.

In addition, nearly 70% of airport concession workers are covered by collective bargaining agreements.

The proposal to be considered by the City Council is the result of what labor authorities called segmental bargaining, or negotiating a labor contract across a group of employees doing similar work across a multitude of employers.

Segmental bargaining came to the restaurant industry in April with the creation of the Fast Food Council, a nine-person panel empowered by the state to set wages for fast-food employees who work for a restaurant with at least 59 sister branches nationwide. The council consists of four workers’ representatives and four employers, with a neutral government worker wielding a ninth and potentially tie-breaking vote.

Simultaneous with the creation of the council, the minimum wage for covered fast-food workers rose to $20 an hour on April 1, from a previous floor of $16.