A bipartisan pair of senators is introducing a new bill on the fourth anniversary of the Abraham Accords to deepen cooperation between U.S. and Middle East partners. 

The LINK Act, brought forth by Sens. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, and Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., co-chairs of the Abraham Accords Caucus, would establish a ‘military subject matter exchange program’ to deepen cultural ties and strategic cooperation between American troops and allies in the Middle East. 

‘In the face of emboldened Iranian aggression, I’m deepening the historic partnerships created through the Abraham Accords four years ago today,’ said Ernst.

‘More cooperation among our Middle East partners is what Tehran fears. The LINK Act accomplishes this by coordinating military planning and creating a permanent and effective defense alliance. By working hand-in-hand with our partners, the strength and security of our nations grows.’

The pair of senators had three of their previous Middle East-related bills signed into law. 

The Gulf States of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain signed a normalization deal with Israel in 2020, brokered by the U.S., known as the Abraham Accords.

As part of the agreements, UAE and Bahrain recognized Israel’s sovereignty and established full diplomatic relations. It was the first time Israel had established peace with an Arab country since 1994 with the Israel-Jordan peace treaty. 

In the months that followed, Sudan and Morocco signed deals to normalize relations with Israel. 

The bill comes at a time of sky-high tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Israel and Saudi Arabia had been nearing a deal that included the U.S. and would have normalized relations when Hamas launched its Oct. 7 attack on Israel. 

The U.S. has been bolstering its relations with nations in the Middle East to counter the growing threat of a potential nuclear Iran – even ones with mixed human rights records like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. 

The Biden administration recently lifted a hold on $320 million in military aid to Egypt that it had frozen in response to human rights concerns, bringing the total amount up to $1.3 billion transferred from Washington to Cairo this year. 

Egypt is playing a central role in the talks between Hamas and Israel about a cease-fire agreement.

Toward the end of his presidency, Ronald Reagan was doing the standard round of exit interviews, one with Tom Brokaw of NBC. During the taping, Brokaw asked Reagan a rather brilliant question, namely, was there anything from Reagan’s Hollywood days that helped him become a better president? 

The Gipper thought for a moment and finally replied, ‘I don’t know how you can do this job and not be an actor.’ There was great wisdom in what Reagan had to say.

Shakespeare was right. ‘All the world is a stage.’ The great leaders of the world all knew about presentation. Think about it. 

Julius Caesar in his finest armor. Napoleon insisted on his own uniform, and that of his men be presentable. George Washington understood that what one looks like is a part of leadership. He never went before his men without being dressed in his finest, his horse brushed, and the leather well-tended. He said little publicly, which only added to his aura. When he went before the Constitutional Convention, he was always dressed in his finest uniform. Same with Robert E. Lee. When he went to surrender to Gen. U.S. Grant, the Confederate leader put on his best uniform. 

Sun Tzu once said that ‘victorious warriors win first then go to war.’ By that, he meant winners gain a psychological advantage before engaging the enemy. And presentation is a large part of that advantage.

Dressing in character is also a part of leadership. Abraham Lincoln was no slave to fashion, but the old log splitter understood his ruffled style worked for him. It was what citizens wanted. It was a part of his authenticity.

The internet is replete with stories about leadership and presentation, something lost on the intelligentsia today. Donald Trump has his own style, and that is key. His rallies are a lot of entertaining and informative. He commands attention. He obviously has fun on stage.

In that manner, Trump may be the most exciting president in modern history. From his hair style to his ubiquitous red hat to his rallies, everything is unique. None of it is accidental; Trump has always understood the importance of not just being a leader but also being seen as a leader. Donald Trump in a Speedo would not work for him. JFK in a bathing suit worked for him. In fact, JFK was one of those lucky men who clothing always looked ‘leaderly’ on. Manly. In control.

Arguably, no moment revealed Trump’s leadership more profoundly than when, just moments after his assassination attempt, he stood up before the audience, put his fists in the air, and shouted with defiance, ‘Fight!’

Juxtapose this with his current ultra leftist challenger. There is nothing iconic or memorable about the Kamala Harris campaign. Her campaign sign is arguably one of the most bland ever conceived of, static white letters on a plain blue field. 

Harris has tried her best to coin phrases like ‘coconut army’ and ‘brat.’ They’ve even gone so far as to try and appropriate the patina of rural Americans by slapping the Harris campaign logo on a camouflage hat and calling it a day. Just the other day, she tried out a southern accent, Of course, it backfired. Her presentation seems so forced, so insincere. Fakery.

The American people crave authenticity, and they see right through phonies. California coastal elite Kamala Harris in a camouflage hat isn’t authentic. It didn’t work when then-presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren attempted to do a livestream with a beer. It didn’t work when Barack Obama had the White House release photos of him at a gun range. And it most definitely didn’t work when Michael Dukakis rode in a tank in 1988. 

The socialist Tim Walz is even worse. He screams fraud! The cognitive dissonance between the trappings of mainstream America and the ideology of a far-left ivory tower elite is making him inauthentic to millions of Americans. He’s not even good enough to be a cliché. He is something worse.

Even Democrats concede that no president in modern history has created more iconic looks than Ronald Reagan. From his California ranch to his cowboy boots to his legendary Stetson hat, Reagan looked and felt exactly like what a conservative should be. Bold, classic, individualistic and quintessentially American.

For this and a thousand other reasons, Reagan is now regarded as one of our four greatest presidents. And Biden? People have already forgotten him and his presidency. To coin a phrase, he will be consigned to the dustbin of history where all miserable presidents belong. His presentation and lack of leadership have banished him to the list of failed presidents.

And Shakespeare was right: ‘The play’s the thing!’

Leonard Leo, who operates a vast network of conservative nonprofits, called on his groups to start ‘weaponizing’ their ideas, something he said the left has been championing over the years. 

A letter sent to groups supported by Leo’s 85 Fund on Wednesday said it would be undergoing a ‘comprehensive review’ of entities it supports, and ‘will be adjusting the extent to which it funds ideas and policy development.’ The goal, according to Leo’s letter, is to ensure their philanthropic efforts are not overly focused on ‘ideation,’ or as Leo describes it, ‘the development of and education about conservative ideas and policies.’ Rather, Leo wants his groups to adopt more aggressive tactics that ‘weaponize’ their ideas and produce more tangible results, something he suggested liberals have championed effectively for their causes.  

‘The Left built powerful networks of activists, academics, journalists, and philanthropists, along with professionals from other disciplines, who could collaborate to influence public attitudes and generate political pressure on public officials,’ Leo said. ‘They invested in talent pipelines to populate the power centers inside government, where policy would be implemented. They incubated litigation as a means of leveraging the law to produce change. And, beyond politics and law, left-wing philanthropy built or took over enormous infrastructure to control various cultural chokepoints.’

‘In contrast,’ Leo continued, ‘vastly insufficient funds are going toward operationalizing and weaponizing [conservative] ideas and policies to crush liberal dominance.’

Leo, the co-chairman and former executive vice president of the Federalist Society, a group focusing on advancing the principles of a limited, constitutional government, controls a $1.6 billion war chest.  The money was given to him by industrialist Barre Seid to fund his network of conservative groups.

Leo’s letter cited the George Soros-funded Tides Foundation and the Hansjörg Wyss-backed Arabella Advisors as examples of groups that ‘incubate action-oriented campaigns.’ He pointed to their support of nationwide NGOs like Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). SJP has been at the forefront of drumming up anti-Israel sentiment at college campuses across the country since Hamas’ Oct. 7 terror attack that killed over a thousand innocent Israelis and took hundreds hostage. Meanwhile, WPATH has been at the forefront of the transgender movement, publishing standards of care that doctors and public officials alike have used to justify ‘gender-affirming care’ for minors.

‘With donors like Hansjörg Wyss and the Arabella Advisors network having billions at their disposal, the left is able to significantly outspend the conservative movement to shift American society,’ Leo told Fox News Digital. ‘Consequently, we need to do more with less, focusing on leveraging the conservative movement’s talent to have impact, if we want to be successful.’

Leo has been credited with transforming the Federalist Society into the powerhouse lawfare organization it is today with more than 70,000 members. Meanwhile, Leo has also been considered one of the foremost influences on former President Trump’s Supreme Court nominations. Prior to Trump’s selection of Federalist Society-backed Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, Leo drew up a list of potential judges that Trump released during his 2016 campaign.  

After Trump was elected, Leo stepped away from his daily duties with the Federalist Society, but remained its co-chair. Meanwhile, in 2022, Leo’s Marble Freedom Trust received a $1.6 billion gift from American businessman and GOP donor Barre Seid. Leo still has roughly $1 billion left to spend, the Financial Times reported this week after analyzing public financial disclosures. A representative for Leo declined to share how many total NGOs receive financial support from the 85 Fund. 

‘[W]e need to do more with less, focusing on leveraging the conservative movement’s talent to have impact, if we want to be successful.’

‘Expect us to increase support for organizations that call out companies and financial institutions that bend to the woke mind virus spread by regulators and NGOs, so that they have to pay a price for putting extreme left-wing ideology ahead of consumers,’ Leo said during a rare interview he granted to the Financial Times. 

Leo told the outlet that his Marble Freedom Trust has been increasingly focused on going after ‘woke’ banks and China-friendly entities across a range of sectors, such as food production and artificial intelligence. Leo also indicated he plans to invest in local media in the U.S. over the next year.  

The call from Leo for his groups to ‘operationalize’ and ‘weaponize’ their ideas has been met with anger from liberal critics. 

‘Leonard Leo’s brazen call to ‘weaponize’ the conservative movement further exposes his strategy of using his dark money network to force his right-wing agenda on everyday Americans and stack the deck in favor of the powerful few,’ said Carolina Ciccone, president of NGO watchdog Accountable.US. ‘Let’s be very clear: This isn’t just about shaping conservative thought — it’s about weaponizing the very institutions that are set up to protect the rights of everyday Americans to serve the interests of right-wing special interests.’

Jay Willis, former GQ writer and current editor-in-chief of progressive commentary website Balls & Strikes, accused Leo of trying to rebrand ‘as an Elon Musk-style culture warrior who rants about the ‘woke mind virus.’’

Due to weakness in the White House, we are experiencing chaos in the Middle East, strikes on our servicemembers, the bloodiest attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust, and Americans still held hostage by Iran-backed Hamas.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Four years ago, we were celebrating the signing of the Abraham Accords, a historic advancement to peace in the Middle East ushered in under the Trump administration. On September 15, 2020, President Trump forged these agreements, facilitating the greatest deal between Israel and Arab countries in modern history. Americans, Israelis, and Arabs were brought together under a common vision. Cultural, economic, and defense ties were deepened, and the world watched as Iran’s biggest fear came true: a more unified and prosperous Middle East. This was peace through strength in action.

As a combat veteran who served in the Middle East, I co-founded the Abraham Accords Caucus, so Congress could build upon the Accords’ strong foundation. Through this work, I’ve created laws to strengthen and expand these agreements by establishing integrated defense systems with our allies and partners to protect from Iran-backed attacks on land and at sea.

Unfortunately, after three-and-a-half years of Biden and Harris in the White House, Iran-backed terrorists have put these efforts to the ultimate test. In April, the U.S., Israel, and our Arab partners worked together to shoot down a barrage of 300 Iranian projectiles, a feat made possible by my DEFEND Act. Additionally, my MARITIME Act paved the way for us to work with our partners to counter Iran-backed Houthis’ near daily threats in the Red Sea that disrupt innocent civilians and commerce.

The world is on fire and it has cost American lives.

It’s clear that Iran wants chaos; and, under President Biden and Vice President Harris’ lack of leadership, their wishes have come true.

The Biden-Harris White House has refused to enforce sanctions on Tehran, allowing the regime to fuel and fund its proxy terrorism and hostage diplomacy. Emboldened by this administration’s decisions, Iran-backed Hamas worked to undo the progress made by the Abraham Accords when these terrorists invaded Israel on October 7, 2023.

And yet, 11 months since this invasion, Israel and Arab states have demonstrated that they remain committed to the Trump-led agreement despite ongoing tensions in the region. While this is proof that the unifying strength behind the Abraham Accords is alive, we must be vigilant to ensure progress does not unravel because of the Biden-Harris administration’s appeasement. 

During my fourth trip to the Middle East since the October 7th attack, regional leaders told me they are ready to give up on American leadership. Make no mistake, this is a result of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’ decision to abandon our allies and embolden our adversaries – it started with the Afghanistan withdrawal and has continued to this day.

The world is on fire, and it has cost American lives.

Now more than ever, we must build upon the Trump-era Abraham Accords, which is why I’m furthering my work to ensure Israel, and our allies, have a comprehensive strategy of cooperation to counter Iran’s efforts.

My STARS Act would extend defense coordination to protect from hostile space activities. This will improve satellite security coordination to enhance the United States’ situational awareness, defend against threats from adversaries, and deepen space cooperation with Israel and other allies in the Middle East.

To further integrate regional defense operations, my LINK Act would strengthen people-to-people ties between military leaders of Abraham Accords countries, and my AI Accords Act would direct the Pentagon to increase partner-sharing network capabilities to improve cyber cooperation. 

The power of the Accords is not dead. In fact, their continued existence is exactly what Iran fears. A united Middle East helps put an end to the regime’s wave of terror across the region that seeks to destabilize our partners, kill American servicemembers, and destroy the United States, Israel, and our allies. Four years into the Abraham Accords, too much is at stake: we cannot afford to fail. 

President Trump brought our partners together and extinguished Iran’s dream of destruction in the region. Four more years of Kamala Harris will breed further chaos, put the nail in the coffin of American leadership, and stifle the Accords. 

This moment demands a new commander-in-chief, not another abandoner-in-chief.

Britain is facing a free speech crisis as the new left-wing government, overzealous police and courts crackdown on freedom of expression. 

Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the leader of the ruling Labour Party, and his government of barely two months have been accused of rolling back free speech protections on safety grounds and failing to root out selective enforcement of laws.

‘Every Brit fundamentally has the right to free speech, but for several years now, we’ve seen a growing trend,’ Lois McLatchie Miller, Senior Legal Communications Officer for Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) U.K., told Fox News Digital. ‘It’s only now becoming widely recognized that certain groups, depending on their beliefs, seem to have their free speech curtailed much more easily than others with different viewpoints.’

Widespread riots in the streets of England last month and a heavy-handed approach in response to the social unrest reignited the debate about free speech. 

The U.K. has been grappling with harsh policing of online speech for years. In 2019, ex-police officer Harry Miller was investigated over social media posts deemed transphobic for questioning whether transgender women were real women. Miller’s posts were recorded by the police as a ‘non-crime hate incident,’ prompting him to challenge the designation in court. In 2020, the U.K. court ruled in Miller’s favor but stopped short of changing the guidelines that allow police to pursue people over comments made online.

During a speech to parliament, Reform Party leader Nigel Farage complained of the double standards in applying the law evenly. Farage wrote on X ‘Establishment MPs can heckle me all they like, but the British people are angry that we are living through a two-tier policing and justice system.’

Last month, the government issued a direct reminder of such laws and warned its citizens to be mindful of posting content deemed offensive and threatening with imprisonment. The Crown Prosecution Service posted a warning to social media platform X, which was amplified by the government’s official social media accounts, warning citizens, ‘Think before you post!’

‘Content that incites violence or hatred isn’t just harmful – it can be illegal,’ the agency wrote. ‘The CPS takes online violence seriously and will prosecute when the legal test is met. Remind those close to you to share responsibly or face the consequences.’ The post added: ‘The British government is cracking down on people who share social media posts about the U.K. riots that it judges are ‘likely to start racial hatred.”

The government simultaneously began working on measures to force social media companies to suppress perceived ‘fake news’ and legal content deemed harmful, to avoid fueling social unrest. The new measures would expand the scope of Britain’s Online Safety Act by targeting and making social media companies liable for ‘legal but harmful’ content.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan encouraged the Stammer government to swiftly implement changes to the online safety law, saying that currently, ‘it’s not fit for purpose.’

‘I think very swiftly the government has realized there needs to be amendments to the Online Safety Act,’ Khan said in an interview with the Guardian. ‘I think what the government should do very quickly is check if it is fit for purpose. I think it’s not fit for purpose.’

But concerns over free speech in the U.K. extend beyond online, with double standards applied to different viewpoints and political protests.

‘This isn’t 1984, but 2024.’

Last weekend, two pro-Israel counter-protesters, Mark Birbeck and Niyak Ghorbani, carrying a ‘Hamas is terrorist’ sign, were arrested during the pro-Hamas march in London on suspicion of breach of peace. The counter-protesters’ presence allegedly led to the march being paused, and they were arrested following a struggle with police officers. 

Ghorbani is a well-known anti-Hamas Iranian dissident whom London’s Metropolitan Police tried to ban from attending future anti-Israel protests as part of his bail conditions after he was arrested for opposing the protests. A court rebuked the force and ruled in April that such bail conditions were neither proportionate nor necessary. The moniker ‘Two-tier Kier’ is how some on social media have responded to the new prime minister’s policies. 

‘On one hand, we see groups like environmental protesters, such as Stop Oil activists, or pro-Palestinian, and even in some cases, pro-Hamas protesters being given a wide berth to express their beliefs, sometimes using very violent language,’ Lois said. ‘Yet, when we consider different types of protests, for example, Christians going out to pray near places of worship, they often face much stricter restrictions.’

For example, Dia Moodley, a Christian pastor who occasionally engages in street evangelism, was forced to sue the local police after the force forbade him from ‘passing comments on any other religion or comparing them to Christianity’ and ‘passing comments on beliefs held by Atheists or those who believe in evolution.’ Moodley won in court earlier this year, and the police admitted that the restrictions on free speech imposed on Moodley were ‘disproportionate.’

‘Two-tier Kier’ is how some on social media have responded to the new prime minister’s policies.

Adam Smith-Connor, a Christian military veteran, meanwhile, is set to appear in court next week after being fined and criminally prosecuted over praying silently near an abortion facility. Local authorities alleged that Smith-Connor’s silent prayer violated the so-called ‘buffer zone,’ a designated area where individuals are allowed to express approval or disapproval of abortion.

‘Silent prayer is not, and can never be, a crime. Yet, the prosecution of Adam Smith-Connor – who served in Afghanistan to uphold fundamental freedoms for everyone – shows an authoritarian move towards ‘thought-policing’ in the U.K. This isn’t 1984, but 2024. And yet, the determination of the state to clamp down hard on even silent Christian beliefs – while protecting the free expression of others with different views – is clearly exposed,’ said McLatchie Miller.

Yet, there is a growing backlash against the government’s anti-free speech stance, particularly the decision to pause the implementation and potentially scrap entirely the free speech law in higher education over safety concerns. 

Over 600 academics and intellectuals, including seven Nobel laureates, signed a letter urging the government to reconsider the decision to shelve the law, the Times of London reported. The law was a flagship policy passed by the previous Conservative government to protect students’ and academics’ free speech rights on campus.

‘The decision to halt [the act] appears to reflect the view, widespread among opponents, that there is no ‘free speech problem’ in U.K. universities. Nothing could be more false. Hundreds of academics and students have been hounded, censured, silenced or even sacked over the last 20 years for the expression of legal opinions,’ the letter read.

A long-term study of Havana Syndrome patients was shut down after a National Institute of Health (NIH) internal review board found the mishandling of medical data and participants who reported being pressured to join the research. The study had until now not found evidence linking the participants to the same symptoms and brain injuries. The internal investigation that halted the study was prompted by complaints from the participants about unethical practices.

This comes after the intelligence community released an interim report last year concluding a foreign adversary is ‘very unlikely’ to be behind the symptoms hundreds of U.S. intelligence officers are experiencing, despite qualifying for U.S. government funded treatment of their brain injuries. 

‘The NIH investigation found that regulatory and NIH policy requirements for informed consent were not met due to coercion, although not on the part of NIH researchers,’ an NIH spokesperson said in a statement to Fox News.

A former CIA officer, who goes by Adam to protect his identity, was not shocked that the study was shut down.

‘The way the study was conducted, at best, was dishonest and, at worst, wades into the criminal side of the scale,’ Adam said.

Adam is Havana Syndrome’s Patient Zero because he was the first to experience the severe sensory phenomena that hundreds of other U.S. government workers have experienced while stationed overseas in places like Havana and Moscow, even China. Adam described pressure to the brain that led to vertigo, tinnitus and cognitive impairment.

Active-duty service members, spies, FBI agents, diplomats and even children and pets have experienced this debilitating sensation that patients believe is caused by a pulsed energy weapon. 334 Americans have qualified to get treatment for Havana Syndrome in specialized military health facilities, according to a study released by the U.S. government accountability office earlier this year.

Adam, who was first attacked in December 2016 in his bedroom in Havana described hearing a loud sound penetrating his room. ‘Kind of like someone was taking a pencil and bouncing it off your eardrum… Eventually I started blacking out,’ Adam said.

Patients, like Adam, who participated in the NIH study raised concerns the CIA was including patients who didn’t really qualify as Havana Syndrome patients, watering down the data being analyzed by NIH researchers. Meanwhile, also pressuring those who needed treatment at Walter Reed to participate in the NIH study in order to get treatment at Walter Reed.

‘It became pretty clear quite quickly that something was amiss and how it was being handled and how patients were being filtered… the CIA dictated who would go. NIH often complained to us behind the scenes that the CIA was not providing adequate, matched control groups, and they flooded in a whole litany of people that likely weren’t connected or had other medical issues that really muddied the water,’ Adam said, accusing the NIH of working with the CIA.

The CIA is cooperating.

‘We cannot comment on whether any CIA officers participated in the study. However, we take any claim of coercion, or perceived coercion, extremely seriously and fully cooperated with NIH’s review of this matter, and have offered access to any information requested,’ a CIA official told Fox News in a statement noting that the ‘CIA Inspector General has been made aware of the NIH findings and prior related allegations.’ 

Havana Syndrome victims now want to pressure the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) to retract the two articles published last spring using early data from the NIH study that concluded there were no significant MRI-detectable evidence of brain injury among the group of participants compared with a group of matched control participants.