We need to understand the *real* Boris Johnson. He's not the bumbling clown act we're presented with, which has been cultivated to hide his grotesque incompetence, sociopathic lying, fragile ego & bullying arrogance.
"Boris Johnson can change from bonhomie to a dark fury in seconds. His normally jokey demeanour flashes into a sarcastic snarl, his skin reddens and blotches, his eyes dart into an intense narrow glare and on the worst occasions his lips curl back to reveal wisps of spittle."
Sonia Purnell worked alongside him, sharing an office in Brussels, reporting on the EU.
"He has the fiercest and most uncontrollable anger I have seen. A terrifying mood change can be triggered instantly by the slightest challenge to his entitlement or self-worth."
It was the sight of Boris Johnson in full flow that convinced her that he was temperamentally unsuitable to be entrusted with any position of power, let alone the highest office of all, in charge of the UK & its nuclear codes.
Beginning to see what it is yet?
'His temper, casual relationship with the truth & often callous disregard of others, has caused many people working closely with him to question his fitness for office. He bears grudges, resents being beholden to others & has sneaky & even threatening sides to his character.'
In a judgment about publication of a story concerning his 'love child' with an art consultant, a senior judge raised questions about his fitness for power because of his “recklessness” about pregnancy and the feelings of others when conducting “extramarital adulterous liaisons”.
Johnson has long been feared for his temper & sense of grievance.
The wife of one of his Bullingdon Club cohorts at Oxford said her very successful husband “would not speak about Boris even off the record as he is frightened of what he might do back. A lot of people are.”
When Purnell shared a two-person office with him, she struggled to get used to his “four o’clock rants” in which he hurled four-letter words at a yucca plant for several minutes at deadline time every day to work himself into a frenzy to write his creative tracts against the EU.
And we may never know exactly what happened in Carrie Symonds’s flat, six hours after Boris Johnson was chosen as one of two MPs to seek election as leader by Tory party members. Or why there were shouts of “get off” or “get out” in her voice and a number of loud bangs.
Beneath the shambolic exterior, the genial eye-rolling & joke-cracking exterior that made Johnson liked by millions, there's always been a darker cast to his character. The cult of personality that has arisen around him has enabled him to get away with his conduct scot-free.
His attitude to women — endless affairs leaving a string of women & at least one pregnancy termination — has long been one of entitlement & lack of respect. He has boasted to other men that he needs plenty of women on the go as he is, as he says crudely, “bursting with spunk”.
Over many years, going back to his youth where he expected girlfriends to pay for him & do his washing & cleaning while enduring his infidelity, the signs have been there. There have been several reported affairs, & the mother of one 'mistress' picked up the bill for an abortion.
He hates losing games, & his anger remains an issue. Rachel Johnson is said to fear her brother’s ire if she dares to criticise him in public, or make her disagreements with him too obvious. She has also talked of her brother’s “very Sicilian” attitude to anyone who crosses him.
One victim applied in 2010 for a Chair at Oxford had made the mistake of criticising Johnson in print four years previously. Johnson threatened to do everything he could to prevent him from getting it, & indeed he came an unexpected fifth on the list.
Judge a man by his friends?
A campaign to have Johnson selected as the Tory candidate in the safe seat of Henley saw rivals smeared as 'gay, alcoholic or suspiciously left-wing'.
No one was ever found responsible for the anonymous phone calls and letters, but Johnson emerged as the winner.
In 2019, sources close to the Johnson family said he'd been deeply disturbed by the breakdown of his marriage to his second wife, Marina, that he was “all over the place” & “psychologically unfit” to be a long-term partner for Symonds - let alone PM.
It was Marina who finally ended the 25-year union, refusing to put up with his philandering any more after several affairs.
Apparently Johnson was “devastated” by the anger of his children over his conduct.
His eldest daughter, Lara, rightly called him 'a selfish bastard'.
His casual attitude to other people’s money led Carrie Symonds to accuse him of being “spoilt”.
He was notorious during his time as a motoring columnist at GQ, when he ran up huge parking ticket bills by parking anywhere he wanted and expecting the magazine to pay.
In one GQ motoring column, he reviewed his favourite 'babe magnets', including a Ferrari: 'it was as though the whole county of Hampshire was lying back and opening her well-bred legs to be ravished by the Italian stallion."
Descriptions of women as “fillies” in earlier years and jokes about how voting Tory would “increase the size of your girlfriend’s breasts” sullied his reputation with many women as an unreconstructed sexist.
And he's done very little since to challenge that assessment.
Johnson’s former Commons secretary was in fear of his angry outbursts. “80% of the time working with him was wonderful. The other 20% was terrible. Boris would swear a lot when he was frustrated", often banging the table in anger.
A sub-editor at the Telegraph endured years of late copy. Editor Charles Moore had enough one week & discarded Johnson's copy. “Boris went completely ape. He phoned me f*cking & c*nting I said it wasn’t my decision. Boris has a ferocious temper. He is not a cuddly teddy bear.”
And now Britain's reputation is in tatters, society polarized, the Union in danger, economy broken, & 126,000 dead - all because we elected an angry clown.
Voters know it. The Tories know it. The world knows it.
If you're interested in the wider context, and what Boris Johnson's *real* purpose is, you might like this THREAD on what forty years of deregulated free market capitalism has done for Britain (already read by 150,000 people):
And if you *still* need convincing that bigoted liar Boris Johnson might not actually be the Churchillian figure we've been told he is by sycophantic pundits, journalists, MPs and utterly delusional morons, here's what is quite possibly his finest hour:
And of course, #Eton has a hell of lot to answer for...
And here's some more recent comments from people close to Boris Johnson - all reinforcing what a damaged, selfish, lying, irresponsible, lazy, useless, horrible git he truly is.
Remember, fewer than 3 in 10 of the UK electorate voted Tory in 2019.
Politicians, right-wing news media and far-right extremists opportunistically exploit public concern over asylum seekers in hotels, inciting protests and potential violence.
How did we get here? And why the gulf between public perception and reality?
The government spent nearly a third less on hotels to house asylum seekers between April 2024 and March 2025.
The Home Office's annual accounts show £2.1bn was spent on hotel accommodation - an average of about £5.77m per day, down from £3bn or £8.3m per day, the previous year.
GB "News", which employs 75% of Reform UK MPs, is not a news channel - it's Reform's propaganda wing, co-funded by billionaire Paul Marshall and Dubai-based investment firm Legatum, who see it as an investment opportunity to help protect their wealth and interests.
@Ofcom
In the UK, since 1990, 'due impartiality' and 'due accuracy' have been fundamental components of broadcasting - especially for news and current affairs - and imho are essential for a well-informed citizenry and a fair-minded functional democracy.
GB "News" appears to disagree.
The first broadcasting standards in the UK emerged with the BBC in 1922.
Formal standards took shape with the Royal Charter in 1927, which mandated that the BBC provide information, education, and entertainment while maintaining impartiality and serving the public interest.
Voters need to know how right-wing populist nationalist politicians and radical/far-right nativist extremists construct their divisive discourse and rhetoric to exploit the anti-elite climate and fuel violence and division - and what to do about it.
So what can be done to counter divisive narratives and framing and to help Britain to become a more open, inclusive, fairer, less polarised and better multicultural society?
I make several suggestions in the above article, but make more below,
Countering the extreme right’s narrative of feeling "attacked" and needing to "defend" national identity requires a strategic, multi-faceted approach that challenges their framing while addressing underlying concerns and emotions.
The shameless lie that "Britain is lawless" is categorically false, as it contradicts empirical data on crime trends, rule of law metrics, and the functioning of UK institutions. Reform UK often use fearmongering exaggeration and selective framing to create a sense of crisis.
Official data from the ONS and Home Office indicate that overall crime rates in England and Wales have fluctuated but do not support the notion of a "lawless" state. The ONS reported a 7% decrease in total recorded crime (excluding fraud) from 2023 to 24.
#OnThisDay, 21 July, 1969, the Chicago Daily News published: The ‘love it or leave it’ nonsense, by Sydney J. Harris.
It began: One of the most ignorant and hateful statements that a person can make is “If you don’t like it here, why don’t you leave?”
I reproduce it, below.
Harris was born in London in 1917, moving to the US in 1922. A formidable journalist who established a distinct voice integrating incisive social commentary with wit and humour, his weekday column, ‘Strictly Personal’, was syndicated in 200 US newspapers.
The ‘love it or leave it’ nonsense, by Sydney J. Harris.
One of the most ignorant and hateful statements that a person can make is “If you don’t like it here, why don’t you leave?”
That attitude is the main reason America was founded, in all its hope and energy and goodness.
A few thoughts on Bob Vylan leading the #GlastonburyFestival crowd in chants of "Death to the IDF" (Israeli Defence Force), livestreamed by the @BBC, and the mischaracterisation of the chant by some MPs, news media, and activists.
In England, where #GlastonburyFestival is located, all of us have the right to freely express our criticism of anyone or anything - as long as there is no intent to provoke immediate unlawful violence or there is a reasonable likelihood it will occur as a consequence.
In England, free speech is protected under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998. However, inciting violence is a criminal offence under several laws which attempt to balance public safety with free expression rights.