Ephraim Mirvis, the UK’s Israel-fanatic chief rabbi and genocide-denier, has launched an attack on the Church of England. The Anglicans have offended Mirvis and his fellow Israel lobbyists.
‘Kairos II‘, officially titled, A Moment of Truth: Faith in a Time of Genocide, is authored by Palestinian Christians and examines their lived experience.
This powerful new document declares the reality in Palestine as genocide and ethnic cleansing, challenges Western silence, and introduces a theology of resistance linking faith with justice. It exposes internal crises and reshapes the role of Christians in the struggle for liberation.
The document, a sequel to the original 2009 Kairos report, is also clear that Israel is a colonial project — colonialism “built on genocide”.
Advertisement
Ephraim Mirvis and his tantrum
The Anglican church has a sorry history of collusion in that genocidal, colonial project — at least at its upper levels.
Its hounding, on behalf of the Israel lobby, of Anglican clergy who dare to speak out about genocide and apartheid is a scandal.
The shameful collusion of disgraced former Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, with Mirvis against Jeremy Corbyn in 2019, helped condemn millions to misery under the Boris Johnson government. It also condemned at least 137,000 to death.
Welby’s successor Sarah Mullaly has already scrambled to accommodate the Israel lobby’s hissy fit over the naming of its genocide. An original motion committed the church to “endorsing” Kairos II. The motion was amended simply to recommend Anglicans at all levels to “read” it. But even that is too far for Mirvis.
Advertisement
The Israel lobby demands complete compliance. Any deviation triggers demands for retraction, or else retribution without credit for past collaboration. And Mirvis is outraged that the C of E ignored his call for bishops to reject the Kairos report outright.
So now he is condemning the “shameful” vote even to “engage” with the Kairos report. In an Orwellian statement, he claims the report is full of lies and a “barrier” to to “understanding”, but is clearly most upset that it challenges “the very existence” of the murderous, ethno-supremacist colony.
He said:
This is a document full of falsehood, which openly rejects dialogue, uses extreme rhetoric to challenge the very existence of Israel and objects to existing peace agreements in the region.
Though it poses as a route to understanding, Kairos II in fact functions as an egregious barrier to it, reducing one of the world’s most complex conflicts to a single, warped narrative, which can only harm the cause of peace.
Advertisement
The Board of Deputies jumps in
The ‘Board of Deputies’, which says it exists to further Israel’s interests, of course joined in, and made it clear that Israel is at the centre of its own ‘outrage’.
Senior Masorti rabbi, Jonathan Wittenberg, also made the same “particular” point while spouting other Israeli talking points.
He said:
In particular, the Church of England’s response does not explicitly condemn the definition by Kairos II of Israel as a colonialist entity, or Kairos II’s failure to acknowledge the unbroken historical connection between the Jewish People and the Land of Israel. Nor does it condemn Kairos II’s failure to acknowledge the necessity for a Jewish homeland.
Mullaly still tried to placate the lobby, stating that the church doesn’t necessarily agree with everything in the report because it reads it. But of course, it wasn’t enough. The lobby requires complete endorsement of Israel’s right to expel millions of indigenous Palestinians for its colonial land-grab.
Advertisement
‘Racist’ rabbi
Ephraim Mirvis is lauded and rewarded by the establishment, but is a deeply problematic figure. His political attacks on Corbyn in 2019 and his enabling of the racist right by amplifying the ‘Labour antisemitism’ scam were just the beginning.
Mirvis denies that Israel is committing genocide. He also endorses further land-theft — euphemised as ‘settlement’. And he participates in Israel’s annual racist march, where ‘settlers’ chant “Death to Arabs” and other genocidal slogans. His links to the white-supremacist ‘settler’ right in Israel have led Jewish anti-Zionist activist, Tony Greenstein, to conclude, unequivocally, that Mirvis is a racist.
His outburst against the Anglicans for daring even to read about the suffering of the Palestinians under Israel’s colonisation and genocide does nothing to dispel that. And it does much to exemplify the sense of entitlement of an Israel lobby all too used to getting its own way.
As for the Church of England and its bishops, the overwhelming vote in favour of “reading” Palestinians’ experience doesn’t remove the stain of past collusion or the shame of not endorsing the report because of lobby pressure. It’s a tiny step in the right direction, but it’s time for the C of E and all churches to live up to their founder.
Advertisement
They must loudly condemn Israel’s genocide and UK government collaboration, and to strengthen the global humanitarian, anti-genocide movement.
Unloading aggregate for the Southern Trench Interim Membrane project
If the UK is to deliver a new generation of nuclear power, strengthen energy security and support clean growth, it must also answer a fundamental question often asked in Parliament. How do we manage radioactive waste safely, securely and responsibly for the long term?
Advertisement
At Nuclear Waste Services (NWS), that question sits at the heart of everything we do. On the West Cumbrian coast, between the Lake District fells and the rugged west coast of Cumbria, the UK’s Low Level Waste Repository has been performing a nationally significant role for more than six decades.
Since 1959, it has supported the safe disposal of around one million cubic metres of low-level radioactive waste, protecting people, the environment and the future of the UK’s nuclear programme.
With Government recognising new nuclear as a cornerstone to help grow the economy with clean energy, the ability to manage radioactive waste safely now and in the future is key.
Advertisement
Making waste permanently safe, sooner
NWS is part of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) group whose mission is to decommission the UK’s nuclear sites safely, securely, and responsibly, taking care of the environment and the communities living and working near its sites. Our work provides the endpoint in the nuclear journey and is critical to the NDA’s mission.
Bringing together the UK’s expertise in radioactive waste management to drive our mission of making waste permanently safe, sooner, we’re tackling the legacy of decades of waste from civil and defence sector activities, while also preparing for the waste that will arise from new nuclear as part of the government’s ‘golden age of nuclear’.
Advertisement
Every decision our team makes is focused on the safe, secure, and permanent disposal of nuclear waste. And as a nuclear licensed site, our work at the Repository is underpinned by a comprehensive and robust Environmental Safety Case (ESC), which addresses environmental safety during operations and over timescales extending to thousands of years.
Laying the Geosynthetic Clay Liner at the Repository site.
Long-term protection – capping the site
Disposing of low-level radioactive waste is a long-term mission, and we’re now carrying out important work on the final capping of the site which will eventually lead to the permanent closure of the legacy disposal trenches and vaults.
Capping is a key part of the disposal lifecycle and involves placing an engineered protective barrier over the trenches and vaults, where waste is already in its final disposal location and ready for permanent closure.
Comprising of layers of material, totalling up to 10m thick, this ‘cap’ will permanently protect the waste, people and the environment by layering natural aggregates, as well as engineered materials. Installed to the highest engineering standards, the multi-layered cap reflects our commitment to quality, durability and long-term environmental protection.
Advertisement
As part of our preparatory works for capping, we’re currently completing our Southern Trench Interim Membrane (STIM) project, which involves replacing the protective membrane (liner) over the southern part of our legacy waste disposal trenches that require a new, robust cover to withstand changing weather patterns.
A key component of the four-year STIM contract is collaboration with Nuclear Transport Solutions’ rail division, Direct Rail Services (part of the NDA group) with each train making the journey from Shap quarry to the Repository to deliver over 750 tonnes of aggregate to the Repository site – the equivalent of 36 HGVs. In total, more than 300,000 tonnes of aggregate will be delivered to the site between February 2025 and August 2026. As of 10 July 2026, 325 trains have transported over 285,000 tonnes of aggregate, and by using rail instead of road, we’ve avoided more than 15,000 HGV journeys. This reduces traffic and minimises disruption for the local community, which is important to us. This is an example of how the NDA group model is facilitating collaboration across operating companies to manage the UK nuclear legacy safely, securely and sustainably. We’re making great progress with this work which will see the interim liner remain in place for up to 100 years.
Rail deliveries are currently scheduled for completion in mid-August 2026. The STIM works are due to be completed in 2028 and the procurement process for the next phase of capping is now under way, which will provide comprehensive construction and design services over a 10-year framework.
Repository capping is one of our key projects and fulfils key requirements from our ESC and obligations under our site permit.
Advertisement
Train delivery of aggregate as part of the Southern Trench Interim Membrane work.
Diverting waste to protect capacity
The Repository site receives waste from a range of customers such as the nuclear industry, the Ministry of Defence, non-nuclear sectors such as educational, medical and research, where alternative treatment or disposal routes are not suitable.
NWS helps to drive sustainable waste management for the UK nuclear industry by applying the waste hierarchy – avoid, reduce, reuse, recycle and only dispose as a last resort.
By re-using or recycling where possible, we now divert 98% of waste away from disposal at the Repository site protecting constrained national capacity and improving efficiency.
Community and environment
Advertisement
We have a responsibility to be a ‘good neighbour’ and reduce the impact of operations on our Repository site community where possible. Any potential impacts are always a key consideration when planning our activities and operations.
Neighbouring a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a Special Area of Conservation (SAC), the Repository site is ecologically rich and sensitive. We host a range of species including roe deer, great-crested newts, badgers and pipistrelle bats.
Ecology on a site like ours is about both protection and improvement. It means surveying species, understanding how they use the land, and taking decisions that avoid unnecessary disturbance. It also means creating new opportunities for wildlife to thrive.
So, while nuclear waste management is about ensuring we meet our safety and legal obligations first and foremost, it’s also about working alongside our local community and caring for the environment.
Dignity at the end of life cannot depend on whether a clinician knows about the relevant form or a family has the strength to keep chasing help.
Advertisement
When someone is living with a terminal illness, time becomes particularly precious. Their final weeks and days should be spent in dignity and comfort, with the people they love, not lost to paperwork and phone calls proving they are ill enough to receive essential benefits.
As Andy Burnham puts social care reform back at the centre of Westminster debate, he is right that palliative and end-of-life care urgently need fixing. The government’s promised Modern Service Framework for Palliative and End of Life Care should set out how the NHS delivers the right care, in the right place and at the right time. This ambition must include financial security, because people cannot die with dignity if they cannot afford to live safely and comfortably.
The Special Rules for End of Life are designed to give dying people quicker access to benefits without unnecessary assessments or delays. A terminal diagnosis can bring an income shock, as people may have to leave work while facing higher household costs, including heating and medical equipment. Fast-tracked benefits can help families to manage those pressures and support people to remain safely at home for as long as possible.
Advertisement
Yet the Special Rules are still failing to reach too many people they are supposed to protect. Research funded by Marie Curie and led by King’s College London found that, in England and Wales, more than one in three people who died from a chronic illness did not receive the disability benefits they were eligible for through this route, around 120,000 people each year. With more than 100,000 people dying in poverty annually across the UK, this cannot be dismissed as a narrow benefits problem. It is a moral failure spanning health, social care and welfare policy.
The research also helps to explain why people are missing out. Interviews with patients, carers and healthcare professionals found that uncertainty around prognosis and low awareness of the Special Rules can delay access, while discomfort discussing money and difficulties completing the relevant forms create further barriers.
For families already facing an extremely difficult time, missing out can mean being unable to heat their home or afford transport to appointments. It can make receiving care safely at home harder, even when that is where someone would like to be, while carers may feel forced to choose between taking time off work and paying household bills.
These problems are solvable, but they require coordinated action. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) should work with the Department of Health and Social Care and the NHS to make the Special Rules easier to understand and use. This should include raising awareness among clinicians, providing clearer guidance on Special Rules forms and embedding questions about financial hardship and eligibility into advance care planning, hospital discharge planning and GP palliative care registers, so people are offered help before reaching crisis point. The DWP should also collect better data on who completes the forms, consider expanding the group of approved clinicians who can confirm eligibility, such as hospice paramedics, and allow completion to be delegated once eligibility has been confirmed.
Advertisement
Ministers should also review the 12-month prognosis requirement used in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Prognosis can be uncertain, particularly for conditions with less predictable trajectories, such as heart failure or HIV, both of which are linked to lower take-up under the Special Rules. Scotland has moved to a more flexible model without a fixed time limit, and the DWP should examine what can be learned from that approach.
Everyone deserves a good death, and dignity at the end of life cannot depend on whether a clinician knows about the relevant form or a family has the strength to keep chasing help. The government has accepted that terminally ill people should receive fast-tracked benefits; it must now deliver on that commitment before financial hardship adds to the distress of their final days.
Dr Sam Royston Executive Director of Research and Policy at Marie Curie
Every death leaves a hole in someone’s life. But it’s a rare death that leaves a hole in public life. Rod Liddle’s does. His passing has robbed us of the finest, funniest and most sardonic chronicler of the absurdities of the 21st century. His writing was brilliant: sometimes brutal, always truthful. He was the only newspaper scribbler of our times whose name could be justly uttered in the same breath as Swift’s. You can feel his loss already. You just know the next time something mad or ridiculous happens, you’ll find yourself thinking: What would Rod have written about this?
He died on Sunday evening after a short illness. Until about six weeks ago – when he backed out of work – he’d been a prolific, heroic columnist. He wrote for the Spectator, the Sun and The Sunday Times. He hosted a Saturday morning show on Times Radio, which I loved appearing on. He was once a speechwriter for the Labour Party. He made TV documentaries and wrote books – my favourite was The Great Betrayal, his stirring defence of the ‘uneducated thickos’ who voted for Brexit against those posh twats malingering in the ‘Brexit Derangement Syndrome intensive care ward, wired up to saline drips, attended to day and night, occasionally afforded a few thousand volts of ECT when things get really bad, but still foaming, still beside themselves with apoplexy’.
His journalism career included four years as editor of the Today programme on Radio 4. A man who went from editing the morning show beloved of the Beeb’s leafiest listeners to being nominated for Islamophobe of the Year Award by the nutters of the Islamic Human Rights Commission (sic)? Truly we shall not see his like again. He and I were nominated for that award in the same year, and we often shared our dismay that neither of us won, not least since the prize-giving ceremony was at the Holiday Inn in Wembley, which would have been a great night out.
Advertisement
It was for his columns – dry, acerbic, profound – that he became best known. His prose sparkled like a jagged diamond in a media world dominated by privileged pricks more interested in being ‘correct’ than candid, honest or funny. He was the only columnist who could make you laugh out loud on the Tube. He once said the Severn Bridge between Wales and England connects Wales to the ‘First World’. Back in 2018, when even many feminists were going along with the trans lunacy, he temporarily identified as a ‘young, black, trans chihuahua’. Hilariously, Pink News published a thundering editorial accusing him of ‘dehumanising trans people’ illustrated with a split pic of Liddle and a black chihuahua.
He was an implacable foe of what most people call ‘woke’ but which he called ‘wank’. He heaped derision on the fake left that dominates our institutions. He once said the reason he used the term ‘bien-pensants’ is because it’s more acceptable than ‘cunt’. He ripped the piss out of leftish elites who are ‘aloof from the country’ and understand neither ‘its aspirations’ nor ‘its gripes’. Like many of us, he was heartened by Brexit, which he viewed as a ‘rebellion of the poor’. ‘One can be on the wrong side of history until history suddenly and rather capriciously switches sides, as it did on 23 June [2016]’, he said of the EU referendum and the working classes’ wrestling of the historic narrative from the bien-pensants / cunts. I once gave a talk on Brexit in Kent and heard wheezing whoops of approval from the audience: it was Rod.
Advertisement
Naturally, he fell foul of the tyranny of literalism. When Islamist extremist Anjem Choudary said radical Muslim Brits should become suicide bombers, Liddle agreed – so long as ‘they blow themselves up… a decent distance from where the rest of us live. Tower Hamlets, for example.’ The media fury was intense, as if he were literally inciting suicide bombings rather than, you know, making a joke. When he wrote a column wondering whether he’d sleep with Harriet Harman, a Guardian columnist said his ‘diatribe’ was ‘so disgusting’ that it caused her to ‘flush violently all the way from my breastbone to my forehead’ until she ‘looked like [she] had German measles’. Rarely had the narcissistic insanity of cancel culture been so starkly on display.
What ‘progressives’ really hated about Rod is that he met their earnestness not with indulgence but with scoffing. He was the nation’s cocked eyebrow. He was the irreverent guffaw of everyday Britain. He was a bawdy iconoclast of the northern working class, wielding his unflashy, quite Methodist scepticism against the crank ideologies of the rich and dumb who had colonised the left. The fools called him ‘far right’ but he was more properly left than any of them – a lifelong Thatcher sceptic and devotee of the Social Democratic Party who longed for the restoration of the common sense of our once great kingdom.
Advertisement
To my mind, his ribald humour and natural-born non-conformism made him the heir to the likes of John Wilkes, the pamphlet-publishing tearaway of the 18th century. He carried a flickering candle for the great English traditions of satire and ‘lower-class’ heresy in an era in which you could find yourself cast out for saying lesbians don’t have todgers. Rod worried about lesbians. He once told me that, courtesy of the trans madness, lesbians seem to be an endangered species, like red kites. Truth is, the likes of Rod were the true endangered species: Englishmen who speak as they see, and damn the consequences.
A little-known fact about Rod is that he was kind. He was fantastic company. His throaty laugh could carry an entire night. He was a great friend of spiked, often appearing on our podcasts and bigging up our writers. He and I were due to speak about anti-Semitism in Leeds just six weeks ago. He messaged me to say he couldn’t do it, because ‘I’m not in a good way’. ‘Get well’, I replied, and now I wish I’d said more. Everyone at spiked is deeply saddened by his death and we offer our heartfelt condolences to his wife, Alicia, and his children, Wilder, Tyler and Emmy.
Brendan O’Neill is spiked’s chief political writer and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. His latest book – After the Pogrom: 7 October, Israel and the Crisis of Civilisation – is available to order on Amazon UK and Amazon US now. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy.
It’s easy to assume that the theatre is a world of glitz and glamour. A place where performers have their names in lights and live lives of luxury.
But many theatre workers face the same challenges common across all sectors. Unpredictable hours and pay, difficulty achieving work-life balance, a general sense of precarity.
Performers and other staff in the Equity union have been pushing for an improvement in their terms. And they’ve already had success.
A new deal for theatre workers
Equity members have voted to ratify a new three-year agreement with the Society of London Theatre (SOLT). It covers pay and conditions for performers and stage management working in the West End.
Advertisement
The agreement runs from April 2026 to April 2029. It got approval from 98% of members voting, on a turnout of 75%.
Under the agreement, minimum rates will rise by at least 13.5% over three years. It also improves holiday entitlement and family leave, supports better work-life balance, strengthens equality and inclusion provisions, and recognises additional responsibilities.
Alongside improved notice and scheduling guarantees for theatre performers and stage management, the agreement provides producers and managers with more modern scheduling arrangements, simplifies tour planning, and gives both sides greater certainty over its three-year term.
SOLT and Equity thank the members of their respective negotiating committees, and all those who contributed to reaching the agreement.
Advertisement
Paul W Fleming, general secretary of Equity, said:
For over a decade, Equity has sought to increase annual leave, reduce rehearsal weeks, and improve work-life balance on the West End.
Not only does this agreement achieve these objectives for the first time, but it also lifts minimum pay to a record high in real terms.
We’re encouraged by SOLT’s stated aspiration to use this agreement as a starting point for more regular high-level exchanges on terms and conditions. There is no reason this cannot be the start of modern terms and conditions, and the beginning of the end of low pay on the West End.
Hannah Essex, co-chief executive of the Society of London Theatre, said:
Advertisement
This agreement delivers meaningful improvements to pay and working conditions, strengthens work-life balance, and gives the West End a clear and stable framework through to 2029.
It represents a significant commitment from producers at a time when costs are rising faster than inflation and higher employers’ National Insurance contributions are compounding the strain on theatres.
Even as average ticket prices remain below pre-pandemic levels in real terms, theatres have once again been excluded from targeted business rates relief.
Government must now recognise the cumulative pressure on the sector and ensure policy supports continued investment in the workforce, in productions, and in audiences.
At the opera too
Opera singers are also demanding improved pay, work-life balance and clarity of their terms and conditions.
Advertisement
Negotiations between Equity, represented by a working group of members together with union officials, and UK Theatre / SOLT are set to begin, after Equity submitted its claim on 30 July.
Equity is demanding improvements to the agreement that sets minimum standards on pay, terms and conditions for opera singers, and covers principals, covers and freelance singers working in UK Theatre / SOLT member opera companies.
The claim calls for improved weekly pay, especially to support the lowest paid, and to reflect changing performance patterns in the industry.
It also includes demands for improved notice of scheduling for a better work-life balance and family friendly working, and calls for clearer terms and conditions for artists and engagers.
Advertisement
Commenting on the claim, Equity Singers & Dancers official Lottie Stables said:
The demands from Equity’s membership are clear – for too long they have seen their pay stagnate, whilst being expected to show ever more flexibility with their working patterns.
This needs to stop. If managers are serious about artists’ wellbeing and dignity, they must address the demands of this claim and ensure fair weekly pay, improved scheduling and transparent terms for all singers.
Equity will submit a claim for improvements to terms and conditions for stage management across opera and ballet later in 2026.
Jarrar was arrested for supposedly making “public statements that advocated for the detestation and harm against members of the Israeli and Jewish communities”, Toronto police said.
Advertisement
The force added that he “acted for the benefit of, and in association with, Hamas, a designated terrorist group”. His reported actual words did not mention the banned group:
Teach your children the Zionist entity is the enemy. Teach your children that the resistance is an honour.
Jarrar’s lawyer said his client was innocent and being targeted for speaking against the murder of civilians. He added that Jarrar had not been charged with what the police said he was arrested for.
He faces a single charge arising from speaking at public demonstrations. No violence, no weapon, no one harmed. Speaking out at a protest about the killing of civilians is protected expression, not terrorism.
The police told the media he ‘advocated for detestation and harm’ but he is not charged with that. We’ll be looking closely at how and why this case came to be, and we’re confident it won’t hold up when measured against the law.
Police have provided no additional details or evidence, citing court restrictions for reporting on the case.
Advertisement
Impunity for the opposite side
Meanwhile, the Canadian double standard is no less clear than its equivalent in the US. In 2024, Ilan-Reuben Abramov attacked anti-genocide demonstrators with a nail gun while screaming:
Every fucking Palestinian will die.
Abramov was charged but has never been brought to trial, leading campaigners to suspect the charges have been quietly dropped.
In February 2025, far-right extremist Eli Schwarz was arrested after threatening anti-genocide protesters. He admitted to police that he was a member of the terrorist group, Jewish Defence League.
When arrested, he was wearing a t-shirt praising Zionist terrorist Meir Kahane. Police found a rifle with scope at his home, along with 10 boxes of ammunition.
Advertisement
Schwarz was charged with making threats and improperly storing ammunition but has not been prosecuted.
In December 2025, Gabriella Bodis was charged with assault after threatening anti-genocide protesters with ‘reagent grade’ (high strength) ammonium hydroxide, which is capable of severe damage to the eyes and skin. She has not yet been prosecuted.
Students in Canada have denounced the charges against Ahmad Jarrar.
We’ve written before at HuffPost UK about how Hobnobs’ name actually has a meaning ― the “hob” refers to their homemade look, while the “nob” part (ooer missus) has to do with its knobbly texture.
So you’d expect Snickers to have a similarly self-referential or witty brand, right? Maybe the “snick” is like “sneak”, because of the hidden peanut layer?
Advertisement
No. It was named after a horse.
What?
Yep! According to none other than Mars, the owner of Snickers, “The very first SNICKERS Bar, named after the family horse, was manufactured in Chicago, US, and sold for five cents.”
And per Mars Equestrian (yep, they’re the same Mars ― seems they really like horses), “Frank C. and Ethel V. Mars’ Milky Way Farm in Tennessee was well known for producing Thoroughbred racing champions, including the 1940 Kentucky Derby Winner, Gallahadion.”
Advertisement
The Mars family still breed thoroughbred horses and even has an equestrian sponsorship across multiple disciplines.
Per The Equine Chronicle, the family had good reason to appreciate Snickers the animal ― he was a winning racehorse.
Advertisement
Unfortunately, Snickers passed away “less than a month” before the launch of the bar in 1930. Hence the family named the iconic bar after their recently-departed horse (aww).
Well, sad as that is, I’m struggling to think of a better legacy…
According to National Geographic, crows are some of the most intelligent birds in the world. They have also always been held in incredibly high esteem and are considered to be symbols of prophecy, transformation, change, and freedom.
However, as majestic and revered as these birds are, they are also not to be messed with.
According to Science World: “Crows are incredibly territorial during May and June. They are known to dive and strike humans not just once, but repetitively until the human in question has moved a good distance away from the nest.”
In fact… you may actually want to be a little more friendly with crows and even befriend one. Yes, really.
Advertisement
Why you should befriend a crow
So, maybe you don’t need to specifically befriend a crow but you definitely need to stay on their good side.
This is because a five-year study by scientists at the University of Washington has found they possess an unusually good memory for human faces linked to a stressful event.
Not only do crows remember the faces of humans for five years, but these clever corvids can also warn their friends and family about you, too. I don’t know about you but being the target of a murder of local crows sounds bloody terrifying.
Advertisement
However, if you do choose to buddy up with a crow, they’ll actually bring you gifts. They may be fiercely protective and hold a hell of a grudge but they are generous souls, too!
John Marzluff, conservation ecologist at the University of Washington said that crows take part in “gifting” by leaving behind keys, lost earrings, bones, or rocks, for the people who feed them.
How to befriend a crow
According to Pet Helpful, following these steps can help you to become friends with a crow:
Advertisement
Find food that the crows seem to like and keep it in stock. Crows tend to like nuts and seeds
Establish a regular feeding schedule so they know when to expect you and can create a rhythm with them
Don’t overdo it — you don’t need to feed them meals, just enough for them to know that you care and want to befriend them
Don’t overdo it. Don’t feed them so much or so often that they become dependent—just a handful of something to show you care.
Don’t just throw the food out there and walk away. Stay at a respectful distance to watch them eat. You may see them eat it on the spot, or they might choose carefully and fly off to cache it for later
Don’t get too close to them as they prefer to be standoffish and may feel threatened
But that doesn’t mean every author is a fan of their works’ film or telly counterparts.
Advertisement
Here, we rounded up eight authors who criticised adaptations of their books:
1) E.B. White wasn’t delighted with 1973’s Charlotte’s Web
E.B. White, who wrote the 1952 children’s book, had been in negotiations with the production team John and Faith Hubley.
Eventually, Hanna-Barbera got the rights instead. After their animated 1973 movie came out, White wrote: “The movie of Charlotte’s Web is about what I expected it to be. The story is interrupted every few minutes so that somebody can sing a jolly song. I don’t care much for jolly songs. The Blue Hill Fair, which I tried to report faithfully in the book, has become a Disney World, with 76 trombones.”
His wife, meanwhile, told would-be director of the abandoned original adaptation, Gene Dietch, “We have never ceased to regret that your version of Charlotte’s Web never got made. The Hanna-Barbera version has never pleased either of us.”
Advertisement
2) Truman Capote didn’t love 1961’s Breakfast at Tiffany’s
Author Truman Capote spent many years disparaging the movie based on his 1958 novel, calling it the “most miscast” movie (he’d wanted Marilyn Monroe for the part Audrey Hepburn got).
When asked what he didn’t like about the adaptation, he replied, “Oh god, just everything” – the book’s narrator role changes, as does the book’s ending.
3) Stephen King had issues with 1980’s The Shining
Advertisement
Speaking to The Paris Review about Kubrick’s version of his story, King said he thought the movie was “Too cold. No sense of emotional investment in the family whatsoever on his part”.
He added that Shelley Duvall as Wendy was “insulting to women. She’s basically a scream machine…
“And Kubrick didn’t seem to have any idea that Jack Nicholson was playing the same motorcycle psycho that he played in all those biker films he did… The guy is crazy. So where is the tragedy if the guy shows up for his job interview and he’s already bonkers? No, I hated what Kubrick did with that.”
The writer had penned his own version of the script, which Kubrick didn’t use.
4) Rick Riordan disavowed the 2010 Percy Jackson and The Lightning Thief flick
Advertisement
Author Rick Riordan let his feelings about the adaptation be known on X, where he likened the movie to “my life’s work going through a meat grinder when I pleaded with [the studio] not to do it.”
He also posted, “I still have not seen the movies, and don’t plan on ever doing so… I judge them from having read the scripts because I care most about the story. I certainly have nothing against the very talented actors. Not their fault. I’m just sorry they got dragged into that mess.”
Still, the writer hinted he was “gonna fix” this with Disney+’s 2023 series, Percy Jackson and the Olympians, for which he had more oversight.
5) Michael Ende called 1984’s The Neverending Story “revolting”
Advertisement
Going so far as to remove his name from the movie’s credits, Ende publicly described the movie as “revolting” and claimed, “the makers of the film simply did not understand the book at all”.
The author even reportedly tried (and failed) to sue in order to stop the movie from going out, saying his “moral and artistic existence is at stake in this film”.
6) PL Travers had such a contentious relationship with Disney due to Mary Poppins, there’s a whole film about it
The film, which won a remarkable five Oscars, had a very different nanny to the one in PL Travers’ books (she “never wastes time being nice”) – Travers also disliked the fact that Disney made Mrs Banks a Suffragette.
Advertisement
So contentious was her relationship with Walt Disney that the movie Saving Mr Banks was made to chronicle the making of the film.
7) Alan Moore, the mind behind V for Vendetta’s comics, called the 2005 movie’s writing “rubbish”
When asked to weigh in on the adaptation, Moore said: “I’ve read the screenplay. It’s rubbish”.
He also told the New York Times that for a lot of the DC projects that had become movies, “I don’t want anything more to do with these works because they were stolen from me – knowingly stolen from me.”
8) Moore also slammed the Watchmen film
Advertisement
The writer, who claimed the studio was using his brother’s serious illness to pressure him, said of the movie: “curse this wretched film and everything connected with it”.
Speaking to GQ, meanwhile, he said: “I would be the last person to want to sit through any adaptations of my work.
“From what I’ve heard of them, it would be enormously punishing. It would be torturous, and for no very good reason… It seemed to me that what people were taking away from works like Watchmen or V For Vendetta wasn’t the storytelling techniques, which to me seemed to be the most important part of it. It was instead this greater leeway with violence and with sexual references. Tits and innards.”
We hope you love the products we recommend! All of them were independently selected by our editors. Just so you know, HuffPost UK may collect a share of sales or other compensation from the links on this page if you decide to shop from them. Oh, and FYI — prices are accurate and items in stock as of time of publication.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: the more I shop, the more I want. That is the plight of a shopping writer.
While I’m lucky enough to test probably close to a thousand products a year, I can’t help but build a wishlist of more fashion, beauty, jewellery, and wellness bits and bobs I want along the way.
And while I’ve already rounded up all of the products I loved in July, if you’re looking for shopping inspiration, I thought I’d be generous and share what’s on my wishlist this payday. Just don’t sell it out before I have a chance to buy it too!
The parliamentary standards watchdog has opened an investigation into Reform UK deputy Richard Tice. The allegation focuses on Tice failing to declare an interest that related to a Commons debate on Israeli influence.
Tice himself has disputed media reporting, although the following claim is in part at odds with what the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards stated.
Contrary to garbage in media:
I am being investigated for standing against antisemitism. You could not make it up.
Advertisement
Standards Commissioner is considering complaint by anti semitic anti Israel lobby group over whether I should have referenced my register of interests at start of…
Richard Tice claims probe is over antisemitism stance
In full, Tice said:
Contrary to garbage in media:
I am being investigated for standing against antisemitism. You could not make it up.
Advertisement
Standards Commissioner is considering complaint by anti semitic anti Israel lobby group over whether I should have referenced my register of interests at start of a debate on UK democracy and Israeli influence.
The same anti Israel group failed to notify Commissioner that Ayoub Khan MP did not declare his substantial donation received from a pro Palestine group.
Reform said Tice did not mention in his 22 June speech that he had been on a trip to Israel last September, funded by a pro-Israel lobbying group.
The trip has been listed in Tice’s Declaration of Members’ Interests.
Here is what the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner published regarding the ongoing investigation:
Therefore, it is not the case that the commissioner is investigating Tice for “standing against antisemitism”, as he suggested.
The ‘Rule 6’ stipulates:
Advertisement
Members must always be open and frank in declaring any relevant interest in any proceeding of the House or its committees, and in any communications with ministers, members, public officials or public office holders.
Additional guidance states that MPs can refer to register of interests entries but:
Such a reference will not suffice on its own, as the declaration must provide sufficient information to convey the nature of the interest without the listener or the reader having to have recourse to the Register or other publication.
Israeli influence
The debate in question happened as a result of a Parliament petition passing 100,000 signatures. The petition read:
We are concerned about reported Israeli state-linked and pro-Israel lobbying activity in UK politics. We believe it is important to determine the scope and impact of any such influence campaigns.
We feel that the horrific devastation in Gaza, the ongoing suppression of Palestinians in the West Bank, and the UK’s political response underline the urgent need to scrutinise how pro-Israel organisations, networks, and lobbying efforts may shape government decisions, party policy, and public debate.
(@TiceRichard) 
![[TIKTOK] Lisa Money Trend 2](https://wordupnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/1770257286_hqdefault-80x80.jpg)
You must be logged in to post a comment Login